Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v6 10/13] arm/arm64: ITS: INT functional tests

[Auger Eric]

Hi Zenghui,
On 3/13/20 3:06 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote:
> On 2020/3/11 21:51, Eric Auger wrote:
>> +static void test_its_trigger(void)
>> +{
>> +    struct its_collection *col3, *col2;
>> +    struct its_device *dev2, *dev7;
>> +
>> +    if (its_prerequisites(4))
>> +        return;
>> +
>> +    dev2 = its_create_device(2 /* dev id */, 8 /* nb_ites */);
>> +    dev7 = its_create_device(7 /* dev id */, 8 /* nb_ites */);
>> +
>> +    col3 = its_create_collection(3 /* col id */, 3/* target PE */);
>> +    col2 = its_create_collection(2 /* col id */, 2/* target PE */);
>> +
>> +    gicv3_lpi_set_config(8195, LPI_PROP_DEFAULT);
>> +    gicv3_lpi_set_config(8196, LPI_PROP_DEFAULT);
>> +
>> +    report_prefix_push("int");
>> +    /*
>> +     * dev=2, eventid=20  -> lpi= 8195, col=3
>> +     * dev=7, eventid=255 -> lpi= 8196, col=2
>> +     * Trigger dev2, eventid=20 and dev7, eventid=255
>> +     * Check both LPIs hit
>> +     */
>> +
>> +    its_send_mapd(dev2, true);
>> +    its_send_mapd(dev7, true);
>> +
>> +    its_send_mapc(col3, true);
>> +    its_send_mapc(col2, true);
>> +
>> +    its_send_invall(col2);
>> +    its_send_invall(col3);
>> +
>> +    its_send_mapti(dev2, 8195 /* lpi id */, 20 /* event id */, col3);
>> +    its_send_mapti(dev7, 8196 /* lpi id */, 255 /* event id */, col2);
>> +
>> +    lpi_stats_expect(3, 8195);
>> +    its_send_int(dev2, 20);
>> +    check_lpi_stats("dev=2, eventid=20  -> lpi= 8195, col=3");
>> +
>> +    lpi_stats_expect(2, 8196);
>> +    its_send_int(dev7, 255);
>> +    check_lpi_stats("dev=7, eventid=255 -> lpi= 8196, col=2");
>> +
>> +    report_prefix_pop();
>> +
>> +    report_prefix_push("inv/invall");
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * disable 8195, check dev2/eventid=20 does not trigger the
>> +     * corresponding LPI
>> +     */
>> +    gicv3_lpi_set_config(8195, LPI_PROP_DEFAULT & ~LPI_PROP_ENABLED);
>> +    its_send_inv(dev2, 20);
>> +
>> +    lpi_stats_expect(-1, -1);
>> +    its_send_int(dev2, 20);
>> +    check_lpi_stats("dev2/eventid=20 does not trigger any LPI");
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * re-enable the LPI but willingly do not call invall
>> +     * so the change in config is not taken into account.
>> +     * The LPI should not hit
>> +     */
>> +    gicv3_lpi_set_config(8195, LPI_PROP_DEFAULT);
>> +    lpi_stats_expect(-1, -1);
>> +    its_send_int(dev2, 20);
>> +    check_lpi_stats("dev2/eventid=20 still does not trigger any LPI");
>> +
>> +    /* Now call the invall and check the LPI hits */
>> +    its_send_invall(col3);
>> +    lpi_stats_expect(3, 8195);
>> +    its_send_int(dev2, 20);
>> +    check_lpi_stats("dev2/eventid=20 now triggers an LPI");
>> +
>> +    report_prefix_pop();
>> +
>> +    report_prefix_push("mapd valid=false");
>> +    /*
>> +     * Unmap device 2 and check the eventid 20 formerly
>> +     * attached to it does not hit anymore
>> +     */
>> +
>> +    its_send_mapd(dev2, false);
>> +    lpi_stats_expect(-1, -1);
>> +    its_send_int(dev2, 20);
> 
> Here. You issued an INT command while the dev2 has just been unmapped,
> this will be detected by ITS as a command error. We may end-up failed
> to see the completion of this command (under the ITS stall mode).
I agree this is a case where it is expected to fail. However at the
moment we don't have stall kernel support and the way I test it fails is
by issuing the below
lpi_stats_expect(-1, -1);
check_lpi_stats("no LPI after device unmap");

Otherwise I cannot test this scenario.

I suggest once we get the stall support in kernel, we revisit the tests.

Thanks

Eric

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Zenghui
> 
>> +    check_lpi_stats("no LPI after device unmap");
>> +    report_prefix_pop();
>> +}
>