On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 9:48 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 02/12/20 16:31, Aaron Lewis wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 9:09 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 09/11/20 17:58, Aaron Lewis wrote: > >>>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Lewis<aaronlewis@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Reviewed-by: Alexander Graf<graf@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore | 1 + > >>>> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 1 + > >>>> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c | 2 + > >>>> .../kvm/x86_64/userspace_msr_exit_test.c | 560 ++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> 4 files changed, 564 insertions(+) > >>>> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/userspace_msr_exit_test.c > >>>> > >>> It looks like the rest of this patchset has been accepted upstream. > >>> Is this one okay to be taken too? > >>> > >> > >> I needed more time to understand the overlap between the tests, but yes. > >> > >> Paolo > >> > > > > Pinging this thread. > > > > Just wanted to check if this will be upstreamed soon or if there are > > any questions about it. > > Yes, I'm queuing it. Any objections to replacing x86_64/user_msr_test.c > completely, since this test is effectively a superset? > > Paolo > Hi Paolo, The main difference between the two tests is my test does not exercise the KVM_MSR_FILTER_DEFAULT_DENY flag. If Alex is okay with that test being replaced I'm okay with it. However, I wouldn't be opposed to adding it from user_msr_test.c into mine. That way they are all in one place. Cheers, Aaron
