qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] tests/fw_cfg: Run the tests on big-endian targets


From: Li Qiang
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] tests/fw_cfg: Run the tests on big-endian targets
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 23:04:31 +0800



Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden> 于2019年10月7日周一 下午11:20写道:
We have been restricting our fw_cfg tests to the PC machine,
which is a little-endian architecture.
The fw_cfg device is also used on the SPARC and PowerPC
architectures, which can run in big-endian configuration.

Since we want to be sure our device does not regress
regardless the endianess used, enable this test one
these targets.

The NUMA selector is X86 specific, restrict it to this arch.

Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden>
---
v2: test ppc32 too (lvivier)
---
 tests/Makefile.include |  2 ++
 tests/fw_cfg-test.c    | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/Makefile.include b/tests/Makefile.include
index 3543451ed3..4ae3d5140a 100644
--- a/tests/Makefile.include
+++ b/tests/Makefile.include
@@ -226,6 +226,7 @@ check-qtest-ppc-y += tests/prom-env-test$(EXESUF)
 check-qtest-ppc-y += tests/drive_del-test$(EXESUF)
 check-qtest-ppc-y += tests/boot-serial-test$(EXESUF)
 check-qtest-ppc-$(CONFIG_M48T59) += tests/m48t59-test$(EXESUF)
+check-qtest-ppc-y += tests/fw_cfg-test$(EXESUF)

 check-qtest-ppc64-y += $(check-qtest-ppc-y)
 check-qtest-ppc64-$(CONFIG_PSERIES) += tests/device-plug-test$(EXESUF)
@@ -250,6 +251,7 @@ check-qtest-sh4eb-$(CONFIG_ISA_TESTDEV) = tests/endianness-test$(EXESUF)
 check-qtest-sparc-y += tests/prom-env-test$(EXESUF)
 check-qtest-sparc-y += tests/m48t59-test$(EXESUF)
 check-qtest-sparc-y += tests/boot-serial-test$(EXESUF)
+check-qtest-sparc-y += tests/fw_cfg-test$(EXESUF)

 check-qtest-sparc64-$(CONFIG_ISA_TESTDEV) = tests/endianness-test$(EXESUF)
 check-qtest-sparc64-y += tests/prom-env-test$(EXESUF)
diff --git a/tests/fw_cfg-test.c b/tests/fw_cfg-test.c
index 35af0de7e6..1250e87097 100644
--- a/tests/fw_cfg-test.c
+++ b/tests/fw_cfg-test.c
@@ -210,13 +210,30 @@ static void test_fw_cfg_splash_time(const void *opaque)

 int main(int argc, char **argv)
 {
-    QTestCtx ctx;
-    int ret;
+    const char *arch = qtest_get_arch();
+    bool has_numa = false;
+    QTestCtx ctx = {};
+    int ret = 0;

     g_test_init(&argc, &argv, NULL);

-    ctx.machine_name = "pc";
-    ctx.fw_cfg = pc_fw_cfg_init();
+    if (g_str_equal(arch, "i386") || g_str_equal(arch, "x86_64")) {
+        has_numa = true;
+        ctx.machine_name = "pc";
+        ctx.fw_cfg = pc_fw_cfg_init();
+    } else if (g_str_equal(arch, "sparc")) {
+        ctx.machine_name = "SS-5";
+        ctx.fw_cfg = mm_fw_cfg_init(0xd00000510ULL);
+    } else if (g_str_equal(arch, "ppc") || g_str_equal(arch, "ppc64")) {
+        /*
+         * The mac99 machine is different for 32/64-bit target:
+         *
+         * ppc(32): the G4 which can be either little or big endian,
+         * ppc64:   the G5 (970FX) is only big-endian.
+         */
+        ctx.machine_name = "mac99";
+        ctx.fw_cfg = mm_fw_cfg_init(0xf0000510);
+    }

     qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/signature", &ctx, test_fw_cfg_signature);
     qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/id", &ctx, test_fw_cfg_id);
@@ -231,14 +248,18 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
     qtest_add_func("fw_cfg/boot_device", test_fw_cfg_boot_device);
 #endif
     qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/max_cpus", &ctx, test_fw_cfg_max_cpus);
-    qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/numa", &ctx, test_fw_cfg_numa);
     qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/boot_menu", &ctx, test_fw_cfg_boot_menu);
     qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/reboot_timeout", &ctx,
                         test_fw_cfg_reboot_timeout);
     qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/splash_time", &ctx, test_fw_cfg_splash_time);

-    ret = g_test_run();
+    if (has_numa) {
+        qtest_add_data_func("fw_cfg/numa", &ctx, test_fw_cfg_numa);
+    }

+    if (ctx.machine_name) {
+        ret = g_test_run();
+    }

I think we can omit this if statement. In which case the ctx.machine_name will be NULL?

Thanks,
Li Qiang

 
     g_free(ctx.fw_cfg);

     return ret;
--
2.21.0


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]