Hi, On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 07:59:41AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 05:12:05PM +0000, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 05:58:12PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 04:21:17PM +0000, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > > > > From: Andrew Jones <drjones@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > KVM on arm64 can create 32 bit and 64 bit VMs. kvm-unit-tests tries to > > > > take advantage of this by setting the aarch64=off -cpu option. However, > > > > get_qemu_accelerator() isn't aware that KVM on arm64 can run both types > > > > of VMs and it selects qemu-system-arm instead of qemu-system-aarch64. > > > > This leads to an error in premature_failure() and the test is marked as > > > > skipped: > > > > > > > > $ ./run_tests.sh selftest-setup > > > > SKIP selftest-setup (qemu-system-arm: -accel kvm: invalid accelerator kvm) > > > > > > > > Fix this by setting QEMU to the correct qemu binary before calling > > > > get_qemu_accelerator(). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > [ Alex E: Added commit message, changed the logic to make it clearer ] > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > arm/run | 5 +++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arm/run b/arm/run > > > > index 2153bd320751..5fe0a45c4820 100755 > > > > --- a/arm/run > > > > +++ b/arm/run > > > > @@ -13,6 +13,11 @@ processor="$PROCESSOR" > > > > ACCEL=$(get_qemu_accelerator) || > > > > exit $? > > > > > > > > +# KVM for arm64 can create a VM in either aarch32 or aarch64 modes. > > > > +if [ "$ACCEL" = kvm ] && [ -z "$QEMU" ] && [ "$HOST" = "aarch64" ]; then > > > > + QEMU=qemu-system-aarch64 > > > > +fi > > > > + > > > > qemu=$(search_qemu_binary) || > > > > exit $? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.35.1 > > > > > > > > > > So there's a bug with this patch which was also present in the patch I > > > proposed. By setting $QEMU before we call search_qemu_binary() we may > > > force a "A QEMU binary was not found." failure even though a perfectly > > > good 'qemu-kvm' binary is present. > > > > I noticed that search_qemu_binary() tries to search for both > > qemu-system-ARCH_NAME and qemu-kvm, and I first thought that qemu-kvm is a > > legacy name for qemu-system-ARCH_NAME. > > > > I just did some googling, and I think it's actually how certain distros (like > > SLES) package qemu-system-ARCH_NAME, is that correct? > > Right Thanks for confirming it! > > > > > If that is so, one idea I toyed with (for something else) is to move the error > > messages from search_qemu_binary() to the call sites, that way arm/run can first > > try to find qemu-system-aarch64, then fallback to qemu-kvm, and only after both > > aren't found exit with an error. Just a suggestion, in case you find it useful. > > We don't have to move the error messages, even if we want to use > search_qemu_binary() as a silent check. We can just call it with > a &>/dev/null and then check its return code. I still need to > allocate some time to think more about this though. Sure, I'll review and test whatever you come up with. Thanks, Alex > > Thanks, > drew >
