On 03.04.20 12:12, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 11:58:02AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 03.04.20 11:40, Andrew Jones wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> >>> v2: Really just a repost, but also picked up the tags. >> >> (sorry, missed to pick this one up) >> >>> >>> s390x/unittests.cfg | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/s390x/unittests.cfg b/s390x/unittests.cfg >>> index 07013b2b8748..aa6d5d96e292 100644 >>> --- a/s390x/unittests.cfg >>> +++ b/s390x/unittests.cfg >>> @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ file = stsi.elf >>> >>> [smp] >>> file = smp.elf >>> -extra_params =-smp 2 >>> +smp = 2 >>> >>> [sclp-1g] >>> file = sclp.elf >>> >> >> Thanks, queued to >> >> https://github.com/davidhildenbrand/kvm-unit-tests.git s390x-next >> >> On the branch, we also do have >> >> [stsi] >> file = stsi.elf >> extra_params=-name kvm-unit-test --uuid 0fb84a86-727c-11ea-bc55-0242ac130003 -smp 1,maxcpus=8 >> >> Can that be expressed similarly? >> > > It would still work with QEMU if you changed it to > > extra_params=-name kvm-unit-test --uuid 0fb84a86-727c-11ea-bc55-0242ac130003 > smp = 1,maxcpus=8 > > which is similar to what powerpc has with one of their tests > > smp = 2,threads=2 > > About the only problem I see with that is that we've documented the > 'smp' unittests parameter as taking a '<num>', and if we want to get > other KVM userspaces working with kvm-unit-tests then we should try > to keep our unittests.cfg files VMM agnostic, and stick to its > documentation. > > IOW, I'd probably leave 'stsi' as is. > Makes sense, thanks! -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
