Hi Connie, On 2/15/23 11:59, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06 2023, Eric Auger <eauger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On 2/3/23 14:44, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> @@ -517,6 +583,13 @@ static void test_query_cpu_model_expansion_kvm(const void *data) >>> assert_set_feature(qts, "host", "pmu", false); >>> assert_set_feature(qts, "host", "pmu", true); >>> >>> + /* >>> + * Unfortunately, there's no easy way to test whether this instance >>> + * of KVM supports MTE. So we can only assert that the feature >>> + * is present, but not whether it can be toggled. >>> + */ >>> + assert_has_feature(qts, "host", "mte"); >> I know you replied in v4 but I am still confused: >> What does >> (QEMU) query-cpu-model-expansion type=full model={"name":"host"} >> return on a MTE capable host and and on a non MTE capable host? > > FWIW, it's "auto" in both cases, but the main problem is actually > something else... > >> >> If I remember correctly qmp_query_cpu_model_expansion loops over the >> advertised features and try to set them explicitly so if the host does >> not support it this should fail and the result should be different from >> the case where the host supports it (even if it is off by default) >> >> Does assert_has_feature_enabled() returns false? > > I poked around a bit with qmp on a system (well, model) with MTE where > starting a guest with MTE works just fine. I used the minimal setup > described in docs/devel/writing-monitor-commands.rst, and trying to do a > cpu model expansion with mte=on fails because the KVM ioctl fails with > -EINVAL (as we haven't set up proper memory mappings). The qtest setup > doesn't do any proper setup either AFAICS, so enabling MTE won't work > even if KVM and the host support it. (Trying to enable MTE on a host > that doesn't support it would also report an error, but a different one, > as KVM would not support the MTE cap at all.) We don't really know > beforehand what to expect ("auto" is not yet expanded, see above), so > I'm not sure how to test this in a meaningful way, even if we did set up > memory mappings (which seems like overkill for a feature test.) > > The comment describing this could be improved, though :) > OK fair enough, don't make it a blocking issue for the series and simply update the comment up to your knowledge. Thanks Eric