| Message ID | 20190904085629.13872-1-shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | ARM virt: ACPI memory hotplug support | expand |
This patch is in preparation for adding numamem and memhp tests
to arm/virt board so that 'make check' is happy. This may not
be required once the scripts are run and new tables are
generated with ".numamem" and ".memhp" extensions.
Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
---
I am not sure this is the right way to do this. But without this, when
the numamem and memhp tests are added, you will get,
Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT.numamem'
Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT'
**
ERROR:tests/bios-tables-test.c:327:load_expected_aml: assertion failed: (exp_sdt.aml_file)
---
tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes
tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT | Bin 0 -> 224 bytes
2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT
create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT
diff --git a/tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT b/tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..74ec3b4b461ffecca36d8537975c202a5f011185
GIT binary patch
literal 48
scmWIc@eDCwU|?X>aq@Te2v%^42yhMtiZKGkKx`1r1jHb~B`V4V0NaKK0RR91
literal 0
HcmV?d00001
diff --git a/tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT b/tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..119922f4973f621602047d1dc160519f810922a3
GIT binary patch
literal 224
zcmWFzatwLEz`(%x)yd!4BUr&HBEUHqD8>jB1F=Cg2*ZH@DxXmUMHZ-x3$7Gd2B8jU
X02q8=hbcr=2NT6lGiu<Mhsgo}c|r;S
literal 0
HcmV?d00001
--
2.17.1
On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 09:58, Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> wrote: > > This patch is in preparation for adding numamem and memhp tests > to arm/virt board so that 'make check' is happy. This may not > be required once the scripts are run and new tables are > generated with ".numamem" and ".memhp" extensions. > > Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> > --- > I am not sure this is the right way to do this. But without this, when > the numamem and memhp tests are added, you will get, > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT.numamem' > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT' > ** > ERROR:tests/bios-tables-test.c:327:load_expected_aml: assertion failed: (exp_sdt.aml_file) > > --- > tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes > tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT | Bin 0 -> 224 bytes > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT Do the tests pass with this patch and without the patch that adds the tests? (That is, can we keep the two patches separate without breaking bisection, or do we need to squash them together?) I'll leave it to somebody who understands the ACPI tests stuff to answer whether there's a better way to do this. thanks -- PMM
On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 13:57:06 +0100 Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 09:58, Shameer Kolothum > <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > This patch is in preparation for adding numamem and memhp tests > > to arm/virt board so that 'make check' is happy. This may not > > be required once the scripts are run and new tables are > > generated with ".numamem" and ".memhp" extensions. > > > > Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> > > --- > > I am not sure this is the right way to do this. But without this, when > > the numamem and memhp tests are added, you will get, > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT.numamem' > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT' > > ** > > ERROR:tests/bios-tables-test.c:327:load_expected_aml: assertion failed: (exp_sdt.aml_file) > > > > --- > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT | Bin 0 -> 224 bytes > > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT > > Do the tests pass with this patch and without the > patch that adds the tests? (That is, can we keep the > two patches separate without breaking bisection, or > do we need to squash them together?) > > I'll leave it to somebody who understands the ACPI > tests stuff to answer whether there's a better way to I'd squash this patch into 11/11 test case, CCing Michael (since he's the one who applies ACPI patches) > do this. > > thanks > -- PMM >
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 03:50:15PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 13:57:06 +0100 > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 09:58, Shameer Kolothum > > <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > > > This patch is in preparation for adding numamem and memhp tests > > > to arm/virt board so that 'make check' is happy. This may not > > > be required once the scripts are run and new tables are > > > generated with ".numamem" and ".memhp" extensions. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> > > > --- > > > I am not sure this is the right way to do this. But without this, when > > > the numamem and memhp tests are added, you will get, > > > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT.numamem' > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT' > > > ** > > > ERROR:tests/bios-tables-test.c:327:load_expected_aml: assertion failed: (exp_sdt.aml_file) > > > > > > --- > > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes > > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT | Bin 0 -> 224 bytes > > > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT > > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT > > > > Do the tests pass with this patch and without the > > patch that adds the tests? (That is, can we keep the > > two patches separate without breaking bisection, or > > do we need to squash them together?) > > > > I'll leave it to somebody who understands the ACPI > > tests stuff to answer whether there's a better way to > I'd squash this patch into 11/11 test case, Pls don't - the way to add this is to add the files in question to tests/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h. Maintainer will create a separate commit updating the binaries and removing them from the whitelist. This way things like rebase work seemlessly. > CCing Michael (since he's the one who applies ACPI patches) > > > do this. > > > > thanks > > -- PMM > >
> -----Original Message----- > From: Qemu-devel > [mailto:qemu-devel-bounces+shameerali.kolothum.thodi=huawei.com@nongn > u.org] On Behalf Of Michael S. Tsirkin > Sent: 11 September 2019 14:56 > To: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> > Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>; Samuel Ortiz > <sameo@linux.intel.com>; Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>; > QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Shameerali Kolothum Thodi > <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>; Linuxarm > <linuxarm@huawei.com>; Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhaosl@gmail.com>; > qemu-arm <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>; xuwei (O) <xuwei5@huawei.com>; Eric > Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>; sebastien.boeuf@intel.com; Laszlo Ersek > <lersek@redhat.com> > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH-for-4.2 v10 10/11] tests: add dummy ACPI > tables for arm/virt board > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 03:50:15PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 13:57:06 +0100 > > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 09:58, Shameer Kolothum > > > <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > This patch is in preparation for adding numamem and memhp tests > > > > to arm/virt board so that 'make check' is happy. This may not > > > > be required once the scripts are run and new tables are > > > > generated with ".numamem" and ".memhp" extensions. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum > <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> > > > > --- > > > > I am not sure this is the right way to do this. But without this, when > > > > the numamem and memhp tests are added, you will get, > > > > > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT.numamem' > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT' > > > > ** > > > > ERROR:tests/bios-tables-test.c:327:load_expected_aml: assertion failed: > (exp_sdt.aml_file) > > > > > > > > --- > > > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes > > > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT | Bin 0 -> 224 bytes > > > > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT > > > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT > > > > > > Do the tests pass with this patch and without the > > > patch that adds the tests? (That is, can we keep the > > > two patches separate without breaking bisection, or > > > do we need to squash them together?) > > > > > > I'll leave it to somebody who understands the ACPI > > > tests stuff to answer whether there's a better way to > > I'd squash this patch into 11/11 test case, > > > Pls don't - the way to add this is to add the files in question to > tests/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h. IIRC, I have tried that but didn't work. I think the reason being, these are new test cases for arm/virt and both SRAT and SLIT tables are not present in the tests/data/acpi/virt folder. As you can see the error is different, > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT.numamem' > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT' > > > > ** > > > > ERROR:tests/bios-tables-test.c:327:load_expected_aml: assertion failed: Not sure I missed anything though. Thanks, Shameer > Maintainer will create a separate commit updating > the binaries and removing them from the whitelist. > > This way things like rebase work seemlessly. > > > > CCing Michael (since he's the one who applies ACPI patches) > > > > > do this. > > > > > > thanks > > > -- PMM > > >
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:55:34AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 03:50:15PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 13:57:06 +0100 > > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 09:58, Shameer Kolothum > > > <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > This patch is in preparation for adding numamem and memhp tests > > > > to arm/virt board so that 'make check' is happy. This may not > > > > be required once the scripts are run and new tables are > > > > generated with ".numamem" and ".memhp" extensions. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> > > > > --- > > > > I am not sure this is the right way to do this. But without this, when > > > > the numamem and memhp tests are added, you will get, > > > > > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT.numamem' > > > > Looking for expected file 'tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT' > > > > ** > > > > ERROR:tests/bios-tables-test.c:327:load_expected_aml: assertion failed: (exp_sdt.aml_file) > > > > > > > > --- > > > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes > > > > tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT | Bin 0 -> 224 bytes > > > > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT > > > > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT > > > > > > Do the tests pass with this patch and without the > > > patch that adds the tests? (That is, can we keep the > > > two patches separate without breaking bisection, or > > > do we need to squash them together?) > > > > > > I'll leave it to somebody who understands the ACPI > > > tests stuff to answer whether there's a better way to > > I'd squash this patch into 11/11 test case, > > > Pls don't - the way to add this is to add the files in question to > tests/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h. > > Maintainer will create a separate commit updating > the binaries and removing them from the whitelist. > > This way things like rebase work seemlessly. OK? Can you post v11 like this? I'll ack then. > > > CCing Michael (since he's the one who applies ACPI patches) > > > > > do this. > > > > > > thanks > > > -- PMM > > >
On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 16:11, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:55:34AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 03:50:15PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 13:57:06 +0100 > > > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > Do the tests pass with this patch and without the > > > > patch that adds the tests? (That is, can we keep the > > > > two patches separate without breaking bisection, or > > > > do we need to squash them together?) > > > > > > > > I'll leave it to somebody who understands the ACPI > > > > tests stuff to answer whether there's a better way to > > > I'd squash this patch into 11/11 test case, > > > > > > Pls don't - the way to add this is to add the files in question to > > tests/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h. > > > > Maintainer will create a separate commit updating > > the binaries and removing them from the whitelist. Who is "maintainer" in this part of the process? Why can't the submitter just create the patches and send them? > > This way things like rebase work seemlessly. > > > OK? > > Can you post v11 like this? I'll ack then. thanks -- PMM
This series is an attempt to provide device memory hotplug support on ARM virt platform. This is based on Eric's recent works here[1] and carries some of the pc-dimm related patches dropped from his series. The kernel support for arm64 memory hot add was added recently by Robin and hence the guest kernel should be => 5.0-rc1. NVDIM support is not included currently as we still have an unresolved issue while hot adding NVDIMM[2]. However NVDIMM cold plug patches can be included, but not done for now, for keeping it simple. This makes use of GED device to sent hotplug ACPI events to the Guest. GED code is based on Nemu. Thanks to the efforts of Samuel and Sebastien to add the hardware-reduced support to Nemu using GED device[3]. (Please shout if I got the author/signed-off wrong for those patches or missed any names). This is sanity tested on a HiSilicon ARM64 platform and appreciate any further testing. Note: Attempted adding dimm_pxm test case to bios-tables-test for arm/virt. But noticed the issue decribed here[5]. This is under investigation now. Thanks, Shameer [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10837565/ [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10783589/ [3] https://github.com/intel/nemu/blob/topic/virt-x86/hw/acpi/ged.c [4] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2019-May/651763.html [5] https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg632651.html v9 --> v10 -Fix for "make check" failure on x86_64(Patch #1). -Minor updates based on Eric's comments. -Dropped patch "hw/arm/virt: Add 4.2 machine type" as this is already in master now. -Added R-by tags by Eric. v8 --> v9 -Changes related to GED being a TYPE_SYS_BUS_DEVICE now. -Re-arranged patches 8 and 9. -Added GED ABI documentation(patch #10). -Added numamem and memhp tests to arm/virt(#11 and #12) -Dropped few R-by tags as code has changed a bit. -Please see Individual patch history for details. v7 --> v8 -Addressed comments from Igor.Please see individual patches. -Updated bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h to avoid "make check" failure (patch #6) and dropped patch #10 -Added Igor's R-by to patches 4 & 5. -Dropped Erics's R-by from patch #9 for now. v6 --> v7 - Added 4.2 machine support and restricted GED creation for < 4.2 This is to address the migration test fail reported by Eric. - Included "tests: Update DSDT ACPI table.." patch(#10) from Eric to fix the "make check" bios-tables-test failure. v5 --> v6 -Addressed comments from Eric. -Added R-by from Eric and Igor. v4 --> v5 -Removed gsi/ged-irq routing in virt. -Added Migration support. -Dropped support for DT coldplug case based on the discussions here[4] -Added system_powerdown support through GED. v3 --> v4 Addressed comments from Igor and Eric, -Renamed "virt-acpi" to "acpi-ged". -Changed ged device parent to TYPE_DEVICE. -Introduced DT memory node property "hotpluggable" to resolve device memory being treated as early boot memory issue(patch #7). -Combined patches #3 and #9 from v3 into #3. v2 --> v3 Addressed comments from Igor and Eric, -Made virt acpi device platform independent and moved to hw/acpi/generic_event_device.c -Moved ged specific code into hw/acpi/generic_event_device.c -Introduced an opt-in feature "fdt" to resolve device-memory being treated as early boot memory. -Dropped patch #1 from v2. RFC --> v2 -Use GED device instead of GPIO for ACPI hotplug events. -Removed NVDIMM support for now. -Includes dropped patches from Eric's v9 series. Eric Auger (1): hw/arm/virt: Add memory hotplug framework Samuel Ortiz (2): hw/acpi: Do not create memory hotplug method when handler is not defined hw/acpi: Add ACPI Generic Event Device Support Shameer Kolothum (8): hw/acpi: Make ACPI IO address space configurable hw/arm/virt: Enable device memory cold/hot plug with ACPI boot hw/arm/virt-acpi-build: Add PC-DIMM in SRAT hw/arm: Factor out powerdown notifier from GPIO hw/arm: Use GED for system_powerdown event docs/specs: Add ACPI GED documentation tests: add dummy ACPI tables for arm/virt board tests: Add bios tests to arm/virt docs/specs/acpi_hw_reduced_hotplug.txt | 60 +++++ hw/acpi/Kconfig | 4 + hw/acpi/Makefile.objs | 1 + hw/acpi/generic_event_device.c | 325 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ hw/acpi/memory_hotplug.c | 43 ++-- hw/arm/Kconfig | 4 + hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c | 31 ++- hw/arm/virt.c | 127 +++++++++- hw/i386/acpi-build.c | 7 +- hw/i386/pc.c | 3 + include/hw/acpi/acpi_dev_interface.h | 1 + include/hw/acpi/generic_event_device.h | 103 ++++++++ include/hw/acpi/memory_hotplug.h | 9 +- include/hw/arm/virt.h | 5 + include/hw/i386/pc.h | 3 + tests/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h | 2 + tests/bios-tables-test.c | 49 ++++ tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT | Bin 0 -> 224 bytes 19 files changed, 736 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) create mode 100644 docs/specs/acpi_hw_reduced_hotplug.txt create mode 100644 hw/acpi/generic_event_device.c create mode 100644 include/hw/acpi/generic_event_device.h create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SLIT create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/SRAT -- 2.17.1