Hi Drew,
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 03:48:55PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 04:43:01PM +0000, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
> > Arm and arm64 support running the tests under kvmtool. Unsurprisingly,
> > kvmtool and qemu have a different command line syntax for configuring and
> > running a virtual machine.
> >
> > On top of that, when kvm-unit-tests has been configured to run under
> > kvmtool (via ./configure --target=kvmtool), the early UART address changes,
> > and if then the tests are run with qemu, this warning is displayed:
> >
> > WARNING: early print support may not work. Found uart at 0x9000000, but early base is 0x1000000.
> >
> > At the moment, the only way to run a test under kvmtool is manually, as no
> > script has any knowledge of how to invoke kvmtool. Also, unless one looks
> > at the logs, it's not obvious that the test runner is using qemu to run the
> > tests, and not kvmtool.
> >
> > To avoid any confusion for unsuspecting users, refuse to run a test via the
> > testing scripts when kvm-unit-tests has been configured for kvmtool.
> >
> > There are four different ways to run a test using the test infrastructure:
> > with run_tests.sh, by invoking arm/run or arm/efi/run with the correct
> > parameters (only the arm directory is mentioned here because the tests can
> > be configured for kvmtool only on arm and arm64), and by creating
> > standalone tests. Add a check in each of these locations for the supported
> > virtual machine manager.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arm/efi/run | 8 ++++++++
> > arm/run | 9 +++++++++
> > run_tests.sh | 8 ++++++++
> > scripts/mkstandalone.sh | 8 ++++++++
> > 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arm/efi/run b/arm/efi/run
> > index 8f41fc02df31..916f4c4deef6 100755
> > --- a/arm/efi/run
> > +++ b/arm/efi/run
> > @@ -12,6 +12,14 @@ fi
> > source config.mak
> > source scripts/arch-run.bash
> >
> > +case "$TARGET" in
> > +qemu)
> > + ;;
> > +*)
> > + echo "$0 does not support '$TARGET'"
> > + exit 2
> > +esac
> > +
> > if [ -f /usr/share/qemu-efi-aarch64/QEMU_EFI.fd ]; then
> > DEFAULT_UEFI=/usr/share/qemu-efi-aarch64/QEMU_EFI.fd
> > elif [ -f /usr/share/edk2/aarch64/QEMU_EFI.silent.fd ]; then
> > diff --git a/arm/run b/arm/run
> > index efdd44ce86a7..6db32cf09c88 100755
> > --- a/arm/run
> > +++ b/arm/run
> > @@ -8,6 +8,15 @@ if [ -z "$KUT_STANDALONE" ]; then
> > source config.mak
> > source scripts/arch-run.bash
> > fi
> > +
> > +case "$TARGET" in
> > +qemu)
> > + ;;
> > +*)
> > + echo "'$TARGET' not supported"
> > + exit 3
>
> I think we want exit code 2 here.
Exit code 2 is already in use in arm/run. Now that I'm looking more closely
at it, exit code 2 is already in use in run_tests.sh, same for
mkstandalone.sh and arm/efi/run.
How about using 3 everywhere as the exit code?
Also, your idea (below) to use a function to test for supported $TARGETs is
a very good one, I'll do it in the next iteration.
Thanks,
Alex
>
> > +esac
> > +
> > processor="$PROCESSOR"
> >
> > if [ "$QEMU" ] && [ -z "$ACCEL" ] &&
> > diff --git a/run_tests.sh b/run_tests.sh
> > index 23d81b2caaa1..61480d0c05ed 100755
> > --- a/run_tests.sh
> > +++ b/run_tests.sh
> > @@ -100,6 +100,14 @@ while [ $# -gt 0 ]; do
> > shift
> > done
> >
> > +case "$TARGET" in
> > +qemu)
> > + ;;
> > +*)
> > + echo "$0 does not support '$TARGET'"
> > + exit 2
> > +esac
> > +
> > # RUNTIME_log_file will be configured later
> > if [[ $tap_output == "no" ]]; then
> > process_test_output() { cat >> $RUNTIME_log_file; }
> > diff --git a/scripts/mkstandalone.sh b/scripts/mkstandalone.sh
> > index 2318a85f0706..4de97056e641 100755
> > --- a/scripts/mkstandalone.sh
> > +++ b/scripts/mkstandalone.sh
> > @@ -7,6 +7,14 @@ fi
> > source config.mak
> > source scripts/common.bash
> >
> > +case "$TARGET" in
> > +qemu)
> > + ;;
> > +*)
> > + echo "'$TARGET' not supported for standlone tests"
> > + exit 2
> > +esac
> > +
> > temp_file ()
> > {
> > local var="$1"
> > --
> > 2.47.1
> >
>
> I think we could put the check in a function in scripts/arch-run.bash and
> just use the same error message for all cases.
>
> Thanks,
> drew
>
> >
> > --
> > kvm-riscv mailing list
> > kvm-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kvm-riscv
