From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
To: pulehui@huaweicloud.com,bjorn@kernel.org,bpf@vger.kernel.org,linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,andrii@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,memxor@gmail.com,martin.lau@linux.dev,song@kernel.org,yonghong.song@linux.dev,jolsa@kernel.org,emil@etsalapatis.com,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,puranjay@kernel.org,pjw@kernel.org,palmer@dabbelt.com,alex@ghiti.fr,pulehui@huawei.com,pulehui@huaweicloud.com,ast@kernel.org,andrii@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,martin.lau@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,yonghong.song@linux.dev,mason@kernel.org,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/4] selftests/bpf: Update qemu config for riscv64 in vmtest.sh
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 07:19:33 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5ed8c5179098109e321e1cc42ced4bf30fc4bf80603fdaeef517277f38834eb@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260930064607.1908864-4-pulehui@huaweicloud.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1975 bytes --]
> selftests/bpf: Update qemu config for riscv64 in vmtest.sh
TL;DR: The new '-cpu max' riscv64 option in vmtest.sh needs qemu 8.2.0+, so
cross-runs on qemu 7.2 to 8.1 may fail; the "v7.2.0+" comment and commit
message may be stale.
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/vmtest.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/vmtest.sh
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/vmtest.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/vmtest.sh
[ ... ]
> @@ -36,13 +36,13 @@ aarch64)
> ;;
> riscv64)
> # required qemu version v7.2.0+
> QEMU_BINARY=qemu-system-riscv64
> QEMU_CONSOLE="ttyS0,115200"
> HOST_FLAGS=(-M virt -cpu host -enable-kvm -smp 8)
> - CROSS_FLAGS=(-M virt -cpu rv64,sscofpmf=true -smp 8)
> + CROSS_FLAGS=(-M virt -cpu max,sscofpmf=false -smp 8)
> BZIMAGE="arch/riscv/boot/Image"
> ARCH="riscv"
> ;;
Is the "required qemu version v7.2.0+" comment still accurate after this
change?
The riscv 'max' CPU model isn't available in qemu before v8.2.0. In
target/riscv/cpu.c, v7.2.0 and v8.1.0 have no riscv_max_cpu_init() and no
TYPE_RISCV_CPU_MAX, and v8.2.0 is the release that adds:
DEFINE_DYNAMIC_CPU(TYPE_RISCV_CPU_MAX, riscv_max_cpu_init)
The previous '-cpu rv64,sscofpmf=true' worked on qemu 7.2 because the
sscofpmf property already exists there.
On a non-riscv host, run-qemu takes the CROSS_FLAGS path and runs
${QEMU_BINARY} with "${QEMU_FLAGS[@]}". With qemu 7.2 through 8.1 (Debian 12
ships 7.2, for example), qemu-system-riscv64 would fail with "unable to find
CPU model 'max'" and the script would abort under 'set -e'.
The commit message doesn't mention the raised minimum qemu version either.
Should the comment be updated to v8.2.0+, or should the commit message state
the new requirement?
[ ... ]
---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/36681333169
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-30 7:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-30 6:46 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] riscv, bpf: Prepare for upcoming daily CI Pu Lehui
2026-09-30 6:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/4] bpf, riscv: Fix stack-passed arguments for indirect trampolines Pu Lehui
2026-09-30 6:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] selftests/bpf: Avoid jiffies quantization error in setget_sockopt Pu Lehui
2026-09-30 6:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/4] selftests/bpf: Update qemu config for riscv64 in vmtest.sh Pu Lehui
2026-09-30 7:19 ` bot+bpf-ci [this message]
2026-09-30 8:18 ` Pu Lehui
2026-09-30 6:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/4] selftests/bpf: Update DENYLIST.riscv64 Pu Lehui
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=f5ed8c5179098109e321e1cc42ced4bf30fc4bf80603fdaeef517277f38834eb@mail.kernel.org \
--to=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=alex@ghiti.fr \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mason@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=pjw@kernel.org \
--cc=pulehui@huawei.com \
--cc=pulehui@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=puranjay@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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®