On 15/01/2020 08.57, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 1/15/20 7:17 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 14/01/2020 19.42, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 14.01.20 16:30, Janosch Frank wrote: >>>> All CRs are set to 0 and CRs 0 and 14 are set to pre-defined values, >>>> so we also need to test 1-13 and 15 for 0. >>>> >>>> And while we're at it, let's also set some values to cr 1, 7 and 13, so >>>> we can actually be sure that they will be zeroed. >>> >>> While it does not hurt to have it here, I think the register check for the reset >>> would be better in a kselftest. This allows to check userspace AND guest at the >>> same time. >> >> Agreed. Especially it also allows to test the kernel ioctl on its own, >> without QEMU in between (which might also clear some registers), so for >> getting the new reset ioctls right, the selftests are certainly the >> better place. > > Selftests are in development and will be up for discussion this week if > all goes well... > > While the selftest leaves QEMU out of the picture, we're still using > kernel APIs to fetch and reset data, so actually getting guests' > register values requires some fiddling in the guest code. So I rather > have a test that tells me if KVM + QEMU are correct at the beginning of > testing, since that's what most people are using anyways. Ok, as Christian already said, it certainly can't hurt to test this in kvm-unit-tests, too - I didn't mean that you should drop this code here, sorry if that sounded wrong. Thomas
