From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Christophe Leroy <chleroy@kernel.org>,
Anushree Mathur <anushree.mathur@linux.ibm.com>,
Venkat Rao Bagalkote <venkat88@linux.ibm.com>,
Harsh Prateek Bora <harshpb@linux.ibm.com>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] KVM: selftests: add powerpc support
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2026 15:38:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <asAydfQLscU6rXQL@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pkxwkffc.ritesh.list@gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 29, 2026, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > This series primarly adds KVM selftests support for powerpc (64-bit, BookS,
> > radix MMU).
> >
>
> Hello Sean,
>
> Just wanted to check what's our plan on this one?
At this point, I'm not going to get a pull request to Paolo before the normal
merge window. I was hoping/planning to get some early pull requests to Paolo
this cycle so y'all could build on kvm/next directly, but that didn't happen.
> Are we planning for both PPC pre-enablement series of yours and this one to
> be taken for v7.4 merge? Do you think this can go in too?
I'd like to get at least a subset of this series in for 7.4. If I'm reading
things correctly, all of the hacky changes I don't like are for the
kvm_create_max_vcpus_test and hardware_disable_test. And as called out in the
final patch, "fixes" for PPC really should be ordered so that they land *before*
the tests are enabled.
Actually, better idea. Limit patch 1 to just TEST_GEN_PROGS_COMMON, then for
the addon tests, bundle the "fix" with the PPC enablement. AFAICT, except for
the kvm_create_max_vcpus changes, they're all pretty small, i.e. bundling the
PPC support with the "fix" shouldn't be too painful, and then we don't have to
worry about ordering.
As for kvm_create_max_vcpus and hardware_disable_test, drop them from the initial
enablement so we can get the core support landed, and tackle them as separate
series post-7.4.
As for actually landing this, the easiest thing at this point would probably be
for me to grab the patches in a dedicated topic branch that's based off the
kvm-x86/selftests branch at an appropriate point in time. Alternatively, I
could provide a stable tag and someone else could grab the patches, but other
than it being a little weird taking PPC changes through kvm-x86, that's by far
the easiest approach since I'll be sending Paolo pull requests anyways and can
explain the dependencies and whatnot.
TL;DR: what if you post a slightly trimmed-down v6 and I take it through kvm-x86?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-02 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-22 18:28 Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 1/9] KVM: PPC: selftests: add support for powerpc Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-10-02 22:12 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 2/9] KVM: selftests: Enable kvm_create_max_vcpus test " Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 3/9] KVM: selftests: Don't limit LE dirty-bitmap bitops to s390x Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 4/9] KVM: selftests: Split out a KVM_CREATE_VCPU helper that can fail Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 5/9] KVM: selftests: Make kvm_create_max_vcpus tolerate ENOMEM Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-10-02 22:16 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-10-03 5:45 ` Ritesh Harjani
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 6/9] KVM: selftests: Limit the number of VM creates in hardware_disable_test Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-10-02 22:19 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-10-03 6:01 ` Ritesh Harjani
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 7/9] KVM: PPC: selftests: Make nested case on pseries LPARs as resource constrained Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 8/9] KVM: PPC: selftests: Skip idle-page check when running nested on pseries LPAR Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH v5 9/9] KVM: selftests: Move memslot_perf_test off the 256M ELF load address Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2026-10-02 22:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-29 1:35 ` [PATCH v5 0/9] KVM: selftests: add powerpc support Ritesh Harjani
2026-10-02 22:38 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2026-10-03 6:46 ` Ritesh Harjani
2026-09-29 5:49 ` Anushree Mathur
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=asAydfQLscU6rXQL@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=anushree.mathur@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=harshpb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=venkat88@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®