| Message ID | 20201104212357.171559-1-drjones@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | KVM: selftests: Cleanups | expand |
On 04.11.20 22:23, Andrew Jones wrote: > This series attempts to clean up demand_paging_test and dirty_log_test > by factoring out common code, creating some new API along the way. It's > main goal is to prepare for even more factoring that Ben and Peter want > to do. The series would have a nice negative diff stat, but it also > picks up a few of Peter's patches for his new dirty log test. So, the > +/- diff stat is close to equal. It's not as close as an electoral vote > count, but it's close. > > I've tested on x86 and AArch64 (one config each), but not s390x. I see no regression when I run make TARGETS=kvm kselftest on an s390 system with these patches applied. Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > Thanks, > drew > > > Andrew Jones (8): > KVM: selftests: Add x86_64/tsc_msrs_test to .gitignore > KVM: selftests: Drop pointless vm_create wrapper > KVM: selftests: Make the per vcpu memory size global > KVM: selftests: Make the number of vcpus global > KVM: selftests: Factor out guest mode code > KVM: selftests: Make vm_create_default common > KVM: selftests: Introduce vm_create_[default_]vcpus > KVM: selftests: Remove create_vm > > Peter Xu (3): > KVM: selftests: Always clear dirty bitmap after iteration > KVM: selftests: Use a single binary for dirty/clear log test > KVM: selftests: Introduce after_vcpu_run hook for dirty log test > > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore | 2 +- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 4 +- > .../selftests/kvm/clear_dirty_log_test.c | 6 - > .../selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c | 213 +++------- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_test.c | 372 ++++++++++-------- > .../selftests/kvm/include/aarch64/processor.h | 3 + > .../selftests/kvm/include/guest_modes.h | 21 + > .../testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h | 20 +- > .../selftests/kvm/include/s390x/processor.h | 4 + > .../selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h | 4 + > .../selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/processor.c | 17 - > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/guest_modes.c | 70 ++++ > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c | 62 ++- > .../selftests/kvm/lib/s390x/processor.c | 22 -- > .../selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/processor.c | 32 -- > 15 files changed, 445 insertions(+), 407 deletions(-) > delete mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/clear_dirty_log_test.c > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/guest_modes.h > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/guest_modes.c >
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 10:23:46PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > This series attempts to clean up demand_paging_test and dirty_log_test > by factoring out common code, creating some new API along the way. It's > main goal is to prepare for even more factoring that Ben and Peter want > to do. The series would have a nice negative diff stat, but it also > picks up a few of Peter's patches for his new dirty log test. So, the > +/- diff stat is close to equal. It's not as close as an electoral vote > count, but it's close. > > I've tested on x86 and AArch64 (one config each), but not s390x. The whole series looks good to me (probably except the PTRS_PER_PAGE one; but that's not hurting much anyways, I think). Thanks for picking up the other patches, even if they made the diff stat much less pretty..
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:56 AM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 10:23:46PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > > This series attempts to clean up demand_paging_test and dirty_log_test > > by factoring out common code, creating some new API along the way. It's > > main goal is to prepare for even more factoring that Ben and Peter want > > to do. The series would have a nice negative diff stat, but it also > > picks up a few of Peter's patches for his new dirty log test. So, the > > +/- diff stat is close to equal. It's not as close as an electoral vote > > count, but it's close. > > > > I've tested on x86 and AArch64 (one config each), but not s390x. > > The whole series looks good to me (probably except the PTRS_PER_PAGE one; but > that's not hurting much anyways, I think). Thanks for picking up the other > patches, even if they made the diff stat much less pretty.. This series looks good to me too. Thanks for doing this Drew! Sorry I'm later than I wanted to be in reviewing this series. I learned I was exposed to someone with COVID yesterday, so I've been a bit scattered. The dirty log perf test series v3 might be delayed a bit as a result, but I'll send it out as soon as I can after this series is merged. > > -- > Peter Xu >
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 11:41:24AM -0800, Ben Gardon wrote: > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:56 AM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 10:23:46PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > > > This series attempts to clean up demand_paging_test and dirty_log_test > > > by factoring out common code, creating some new API along the way. It's > > > main goal is to prepare for even more factoring that Ben and Peter want > > > to do. The series would have a nice negative diff stat, but it also > > > picks up a few of Peter's patches for his new dirty log test. So, the > > > +/- diff stat is close to equal. It's not as close as an electoral vote > > > count, but it's close. > > > > > > I've tested on x86 and AArch64 (one config each), but not s390x. > > > > The whole series looks good to me (probably except the PTRS_PER_PAGE one; but > > that's not hurting much anyways, I think). Thanks for picking up the other > > patches, even if they made the diff stat much less pretty.. > > This series looks good to me too. Thanks for doing this Drew! > > Sorry I'm later than I wanted to be in reviewing this series. I > learned I was exposed to someone with COVID yesterday, so I've been a > bit scattered. The dirty log perf test series v3 might be delayed a > bit as a result, but I'll send it out as soon as I can after this > series is merged. > Yikes! Don't worry about KVM selftests then. Except for one more question? Can I translate your "looks good to me" into a r-b for the series? And, same question for Peter. I'll be respinning witht eh PTES_PER_PAGE change and can add your guys' r-b's if you want to give them. Thanks, drew
On 04/11/20 22:23, Andrew Jones wrote: > This series attempts to clean up demand_paging_test and dirty_log_test > by factoring out common code, creating some new API along the way. It's > main goal is to prepare for even more factoring that Ben and Peter want > to do. The series would have a nice negative diff stat, but it also > picks up a few of Peter's patches for his new dirty log test. So, the > +/- diff stat is close to equal. It's not as close as an electoral vote > count, but it's close. > > I've tested on x86 and AArch64 (one config each), but not s390x. > > Thanks, > drew > > > Andrew Jones (8): > KVM: selftests: Add x86_64/tsc_msrs_test to .gitignore > KVM: selftests: Drop pointless vm_create wrapper > KVM: selftests: Make the per vcpu memory size global > KVM: selftests: Make the number of vcpus global > KVM: selftests: Factor out guest mode code > KVM: selftests: Make vm_create_default common > KVM: selftests: Introduce vm_create_[default_]vcpus > KVM: selftests: Remove create_vm > > Peter Xu (3): > KVM: selftests: Always clear dirty bitmap after iteration > KVM: selftests: Use a single binary for dirty/clear log test > KVM: selftests: Introduce after_vcpu_run hook for dirty log test > > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore | 2 +- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 4 +- > .../selftests/kvm/clear_dirty_log_test.c | 6 - > .../selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c | 213 +++------- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_test.c | 372 ++++++++++-------- > .../selftests/kvm/include/aarch64/processor.h | 3 + > .../selftests/kvm/include/guest_modes.h | 21 + > .../testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h | 20 +- > .../selftests/kvm/include/s390x/processor.h | 4 + > .../selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h | 4 + > .../selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/processor.c | 17 - > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/guest_modes.c | 70 ++++ > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c | 62 ++- > .../selftests/kvm/lib/s390x/processor.c | 22 -- > .../selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/processor.c | 32 -- > 15 files changed, 445 insertions(+), 407 deletions(-) > delete mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/clear_dirty_log_test.c > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/guest_modes.h > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/guest_modes.c > Queued (or overridden by patches already in queue) patches 1-8, thanks.
On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 10:45:11AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > Yikes! Don't worry about KVM selftests then. Except for one more question? > Can I translate your "looks good to me" into a r-b for the series? And, > same question for Peter. I'll be respinning witht eh PTES_PER_PAGE change > and can add your guys' r-b's if you want to give them. Yes, please feel free to add with mine (if there's a repost). Though I see that Paolo has queued the series already, so maybe it's even easier to directly work on top. Thanks!
On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 7:04 AM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 10:45:11AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > > Yikes! Don't worry about KVM selftests then. Except for one more question? > > Can I translate your "looks good to me" into a r-b for the series? And, > > same question for Peter. I'll be respinning witht eh PTES_PER_PAGE change > > and can add your guys' r-b's if you want to give them. Ah yes, please add my reviewed-by as well, sorry that wasn't clear. > > Yes, please feel free to add with mine (if there's a repost). Though I see > that Paolo has queued the series already, so maybe it's even easier to directly > work on top. > > Thanks! > > -- > Peter Xu >