On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 12:20:29PM +0800, Haibo Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 10:58 PM Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 02, 2023 at 08:59:30PM +0800, Haibo Xu wrote:
> > > Add a KVM selftest to validate the Sstc timer functionality.
> > > The test was ported from arm64 arch timer test.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Haibo Xu <haibo1.xu@intel.com>
> > > ---
> 
> > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/riscv/arch_timer.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/riscv/arch_timer.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..c50a33c1e4f9
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/riscv/arch_timer.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > > +/*
> > > + * arch_timer.c - Tests the riscv64 sstc timer IRQ functionality
> > > + *
> > > + * The test validates the sstc timer IRQs using vstimecmp registers.
> > > + * It's ported from the aarch64 arch_timer test.
> > > + *
> 
> > guest_run[_stage]() can be shared with aarch64, we just have a single
> > stage=0 for riscv.
> >
> 
> Yes, we can. But if we share the guest_run[_stage]() by moving it to
> kvm/arch_timer.c
> or kvm/include/timer_test.h, we need to declare extra sub-functions
> somewhere in a
> header file(etc. guest_configure_timer_action()).

OK, whatever balances the reduction of duplicate code and avoidance of
exporting helper functions. BTW, riscv may not need/want all the same
helper functions as aarch64. Anyway, I guess I'll see how the next version
turns out.

> 
> > > +
> > > +static void guest_code(void)
> > > +{
> > > +     uint32_t cpu = guest_get_vcpuid();
> > > +     struct test_vcpu_shared_data *shared_data = &vcpu_shared_data[cpu];
> > > +
> > > +     local_irq_disable();
> > > +     timer_irq_disable();
> > > +     local_irq_enable();
> >
> > I don't think we need to disable all interrupts when disabling the timer
> > interrupt.
> >
> 
> There is no local_irq_disable() protection during the initial debug
> phase, but the test always
> fail with below error messages:
> 
> Guest assert failed,  vcpu 0; stage; 0; iter: 0
> ==== Test Assertion Failure ====
>   riscv/arch_timer.c:78: config_iter + 1 == irq_iter
>   pid=585 tid=586 errno=4 - Interrupted system call
>   (stack trace empty)
>   0x1 != 0x0 (config_iter + 1 != irq_iter)
> 
> To be frank, I am not quite sure why the local_irq_disable/enable() matters.
> One possible reason may be some timer irq was triggered before we set up the
> timecmp register.

We should ensure we know the exact, expected state of the vcpu before,
during, and after the test. If a state doesn't match expectations,
then the test should assert and we should go investigate the test code
to see if setup/checking is correct. If it is, then we've found a bug
in KVM that we need to go investigate.

For Sstc, a pending timer interrupt completely depends on stimecmp, so
we need to watch that closely. Take a look at the attached simple timer
test I pulled together to illustrate how stimecmp, timer interrupt enable,
and all interrupt enable interact. You may want to use it to help port
the arch_timer.

Thanks,
drew