[PATCH v8 5/6] tests/qtest/bios-table-test: testing new ARM ACPI PPTT topology

Alireza Sanaee via posted 6 patches 11 months ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH v8 5/6] tests/qtest/bios-table-test: testing new ARM ACPI PPTT topology
Posted by Alireza Sanaee via 11 months ago
Test new PPTT topolopy with cache representation.

Signed-off-by: Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
---
 tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
index 0a333ec43536..6bdc25f4df1e 100644
--- a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
+++ b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
@@ -2142,6 +2142,10 @@ static void test_acpi_aarch64_virt_tcg_topology(void)
     };
 
     test_acpi_one("-cpu cortex-a57 "
+                  "-M virt,smp-cache.0.cache=l1i,smp-cache.0.topology=cluster,"
+                  "smp-cache.1.cache=l1d,smp-cache.1.topology=cluster,"
+                  "smp-cache.2.cache=l2,smp-cache.2.topology=cluster,"
+                  "smp-cache.3.cache=l3,smp-cache.3.topology=cluster "
                   "-smp sockets=1,clusters=2,cores=2,threads=2", &data);
     free_test_data(&data);
 }
-- 
2.34.1
Re: [PATCH v8 5/6] tests/qtest/bios-table-test: testing new ARM ACPI PPTT topology
Posted by Eric Auger 10 months ago
Hi,

On 3/10/25 5:23 PM, Alireza Sanaee via wrote:
> Test new PPTT topolopy with cache representation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@huawei.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> ---
>  tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
> index 0a333ec43536..6bdc25f4df1e 100644
> --- a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
> +++ b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
> @@ -2142,6 +2142,10 @@ static void test_acpi_aarch64_virt_tcg_topology(void)
>      };
>  
>      test_acpi_one("-cpu cortex-a57 "
> +                  "-M virt,smp-cache.0.cache=l1i,smp-cache.0.topology=cluster,"
> +                  "smp-cache.1.cache=l1d,smp-cache.1.topology=cluster,"
> +                  "smp-cache.2.cache=l2,smp-cache.2.topology=cluster,"
> +                  "smp-cache.3.cache=l3,smp-cache.3.topology=cluster "
In the coverletter you used different topologies: core, cluster, socket.
Don't you want to test the same config here?

Is it better to reuse the existing ".topology" variant or to create
another one? (I have no strong opinion though)

Thanks

Eric
>                    "-smp sockets=1,clusters=2,cores=2,threads=2", &data);
>      free_test_data(&data);
>  }
Re: [PATCH v8 5/6] tests/qtest/bios-table-test: testing new ARM ACPI PPTT topology
Posted by Alireza Sanaee via 10 months ago
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:30:47 +0200
Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 3/10/25 5:23 PM, Alireza Sanaee via wrote:
> > Test new PPTT topolopy with cache representation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@huawei.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > ---
> >  tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c | 4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
> > b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c index 0a333ec43536..6bdc25f4df1e
> > 100644 --- a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
> > +++ b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c
> > @@ -2142,6 +2142,10 @@ static void
> > test_acpi_aarch64_virt_tcg_topology(void) };
> >  
> >      test_acpi_one("-cpu cortex-a57 "
> > +                  "-M
> > virt,smp-cache.0.cache=l1i,smp-cache.0.topology=cluster,"
> > +
> > "smp-cache.1.cache=l1d,smp-cache.1.topology=cluster,"
> > +
> > "smp-cache.2.cache=l2,smp-cache.2.topology=cluster,"
> > +
> > "smp-cache.3.cache=l3,smp-cache.3.topology=cluster "  
> In the coverletter you used different topologies: core, cluster,
> socket. Don't you want to test the same config here?

The reason I used this one is because it is a weird setup (everything
shared at Cluster) and if this one works, I can sorta say the rest of
the scenarios work fine too. I get that this differs from the cover
letter setup.

I could also add a single test for all combinations of caches. 
They are quite a few. But then I would be happy to do if I should.
> 
> Is it better to reuse the existing ".topology" variant or to create
> another one? (I have no strong opinion though)
I am not sure how to do variants and I just replaced the existing one, 
but happy to do either way.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Eric
> >                    "-smp sockets=1,clusters=2,cores=2,threads=2",
> > &data); free_test_data(&data);
> >  }  
> 
>