On 04/06/2020 13.35, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-05-27 10:55, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 May 2020 18:07:27 +0200
>> Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> First step for testing the channel subsystem is to enumerate the css and
>>> retrieve the css devices.
>>>
>>> This tests the success of STSCH I/O instruction, we do not test the
>>> reaction of the VM for an instruction with wrong parameters.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> s390x/Makefile | 1 +
>>> s390x/css.c | 89 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> s390x/unittests.cfg | 4 ++
>>> 3 files changed, 94 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 s390x/css.c
>>
>> (...)
>>
>>> +static void test_enumerate(void)
>>> +{
>>> + struct pmcw *pmcw = &schib.pmcw;
>>> + int cc;
>>> + int scn;
>>> + int scn_found = 0;
>>> + int dev_found = 0;
>>> +
>>> + for (scn = 0; scn < 0xffff; scn++) {
>>> + cc = stsch(scn|SID_ONE, &schib);
>>> + switch (cc) {
>>> + case 0: /* 0 means SCHIB stored */
>>> + break;
>>> + case 3: /* 3 means no more channels */
>>> + goto out;
>>> + default: /* 1 or 2 should never happened for STSCH */
>>> + report(0, "Unexpected cc=%d on subchannel number 0x%x",
>>> + cc, scn);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* We currently only support type 0, a.k.a. I/O channels */
>>> + if (PMCW_CHANNEL_TYPE(pmcw) != 0)
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + /* We ignore I/O channels without valid devices */
>>> + scn_found++;
>>> + if (!(pmcw->flags & PMCW_DNV))
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + /* We keep track of the first device as our test device */
>>> + if (!test_device_sid)
>>> + test_device_sid = scn | SID_ONE;
>>> +
>>> + dev_found++;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + report(dev_found,
>>> + "Tested subchannels: %d, I/O subchannels: %d, I/O
>>> devices: %d",
>>> + scn, scn_found, dev_found);
>>
>> Just wondering: with the current invocation, you expect to find exactly
>> one subchannel with a valid device, right?
> ...snip...
>
>>> diff --git a/s390x/unittests.cfg b/s390x/unittests.cfg
>>> index 07013b2..a436ec0 100644
>>> --- a/s390x/unittests.cfg
>>> +++ b/s390x/unittests.cfg
>>> @@ -83,3 +83,7 @@ extra_params = -m 1G
>>> [sclp-3g]
>>> file = sclp.elf
>>> extra_params = -m 3G
>>> +
>>> +[css]
>>> +file = css.elf
>>> +extra_params =-device ccw-pong
>>
>> Hm... you could test enumeration even with a QEMU that does not include
>> support for the pong device, right? Would it be worthwhile to split out
>> a set of css tests that use e.g. a virtio-net-ccw device, and have a
>> css-pong set of tests that require the pong device?
>>
>
> Yes, you are right, using a virtio-net-ccw will allow to keep this test
> without waiting for the PONG device to exist.
>
> @Thomas, what do you think? I will still have to figure something out
> for PONG tests but here, it should be OK with virtio-net-ccw.
Sure, sounds good. We can go with -device virtio-net-ccw for now, and
then later add an additional entry a la:
[css-pong]
file = css.elf
device = ccw-pong
... where the test scripts then check for the availability of the device
first before starting the test?
Thomas
