[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v26 00/20] i386 cleanup PART 2
From: |
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v26 00/20] i386 cleanup PART 2 |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Mar 2021 15:57:29 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.0 |
On 3/8/21 2:52 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 3/8/21 2:27 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> Hi Claudio,
>>
>> On 3/8/21 1:57 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> anything else for me to do here?
>>>
>>> The latest rebased state of this series should be always available here:
>>>
>>> https://gitlab.com/hw-claudio/qemu/-/tree/i386_cleanup_8
>>>
>>> When it comes to the ARM cleanup series,
>>> I would like to have the tests pass for ARM, before doing even more
>>> changes, could you help me there Philippe?
>>>
>>> Maybe applying some of your changes on top would fix the failures? I tried,
>>> for example with the arm-cpu-features ones, but it didn't work for me..
>>
>> TBH I wrote these patches during my personal spare time and this
>> became a real Pandora box that drained too much energy. I prefer
>> to step back and focus on finishing smaller tasks before burning
>> out. That said I appreciate your effort and am interested in
>> following / reviewing your work.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Phil.
>>
>
> Thanks Philippe for sharing this, and I agree completely, it is very draining.
>
> The effort of making tests happy that run in artificial environments in
> particular often feels to me
> as too disconnected from actually ensuring that there is no real run time
> regression.
>
> qtest_enabled() (implicitly, or explicitly via open-ended else statements) is
> another painful variable to keep in mind in cpu and machine code, so it is
> not helpful in my view.
>
> I'll try to push more to get the tests running again, if you have any comment
> or idea, feel free to just point me in the right direction,
> that is very valuable to me, even without working code.
Basically I gave up after realizing from Daniel reviews that we need
QMP commands to query QEMU at runtime its built-in features, so we
have build-agnostic tests easier to maintain. I agree this is the
best way to resolve this particular case, but also scale for various
other cases.
- [PATCH v26 11/20] i386: split tcg excp_helper into sysemu and user parts, (continued)
- [PATCH v26 11/20] i386: split tcg excp_helper into sysemu and user parts, Claudio Fontana, 2021/03/01
- [PATCH v26 14/20] i386: separate fpu_helper sysemu-only parts, Claudio Fontana, 2021/03/01
- [PATCH v26 17/20] i386: split off sysemu part of cpu.c, Claudio Fontana, 2021/03/01
- [PATCH v26 19/20] target/i386: gdbstub: only write CR0/CR2/CR3/EFER for sysemu, Claudio Fontana, 2021/03/01
- [PATCH v26 20/20] i386: make cpu_load_efer sysemu-only, Claudio Fontana, 2021/03/01
- [PATCH v26 15/20] i386: split svm_helper into sysemu and stub-only user, Claudio Fontana, 2021/03/01
- Re: [PATCH v26 00/20] i386 cleanup PART 2, no-reply, 2021/03/01
- Re: [PATCH v26 00/20] i386 cleanup PART 2, Claudio Fontana, 2021/03/08
- Re: [PATCH v26 00/20] i386 cleanup PART 2, Alex Bennée, 2021/03/08