On 30.07.19 19:11, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 30/07/2019 16.57, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 30.07.19 12:01, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> To run the dirty_log_test on s390x, we have to make sure that we
>>> access the dirty log bitmap with little endian byte ordering and
>>> we have to properly align the memslot of the guest.
>>> Also all dirty bits of a segment are set once on s390x when one
>>> of the pages of a segment are written to for the first time, so
>>> we have to make sure that we touch all pages during the first
>>> iteration to keep the test in sync here.
>>
>> While this fixes the test (and the migration does work fine), it still
>> means that s390x overindicates the dirty bit for sparsely populated
>> 1M segments. It is just a performance issue, but maybe we should try
>> to get this fixed.
>
> I hope you don't expect me to fix this - the gmap code is really not my
> turf...
No, this is clearly on our turf.
>
>> Not sure what to do here to remember us about this,
>> adding this as expected fail?
>
> There is no such thing like an expected failure in KVM selftests -
> that's only available in kvm-unit-tests.
>
> So the only option that I currently see is to add a printf("TODO: ...")
> on s390x here... would that work for you?
Maybe just keep this as is - we should just not forget about it.
