Hi folks,
I'm writing a test for a device that has one IRQ output line
that is toggled (raised then lowered) by the device to trigger
a CPU interrupt.
Afaics the QTest framework does not provide a way to capture
when an output line is raised because the API functions, e.g.
qtest_get_irq(), read the current state of the intercepted
IRQ lines, which is already low when the function is called,
since the line is toggled by the device.
I'd like to introduce a new API function to address this case,
called qtest_get_irq_trigger_counter():
diff --git a/tests/qtest/libqtest.c b/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
index 471529e6cc..9ed2a43155 100644
--- a/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
+++ b/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ struct QTestState
diff --git a/tests/qtest/libqtest.c b/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
index 471529e6cc..9ed2a43155 100644
--- a/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
+++ b/tests/qtest/libqtest.c
@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ struct QTestState
int expected_status;
bool big_endian;
bool irq_level[MAX_IRQ];
+ uint64_t irq_trigger_counter[MAX_IRQ];
GString *rx;
QTestTransportOps ops;
GList *pending_events;
@@ -481,6 +482,7 @@ QTestState *qtest_init_without_qmp_handshake(const char *extra_args)
s->rx = g_string_new("");
for (i = 0; i < MAX_IRQ; i++) {
s->irq_level[i] = false;
+ s->irq_trigger_counter[i] = 0;
}
/*
@@ -663,6 +665,7 @@ redo:
if (strcmp(words[1], "raise") == 0) {
s->irq_level[irq] = true;
+ s->irq_trigger_counter[irq]++;
} else {
s->irq_level[irq] = false;
}
@@ -953,6 +956,14 @@ bool qtest_get_irq(QTestState *s, int num)
return s->irq_level[num];
}
+uint64_t qtest_get_irq_trigger_counter(QTestState *s, int irq_num)
+{
+ /* dummy operation in order to make sure irq is up to date */
+ qtest_inb(s, 0);
+
+ return s->irq_trigger_counter[irq_num];
+}
+
void qtest_module_load(QTestState *s, const char *prefix, const char *libname)
{
qtest_sendf(s, "module_load %s %s\n", prefix, libname);
@@ -1693,6 +1704,7 @@ QTestState *qtest_inproc_init(QTestState **s, bool log, const char* arch,
qts->wstatus = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_IRQ; i++) {
qts->irq_level[i] = false;
+ qts->irq_trigger_counter[i] = 0;
}
qtest_client_set_rx_handler(qts, qtest_client_inproc_recv_line);
diff --git a/tests/qtest/libqtest.h b/tests/qtest/libqtest.h
index e53e350e3a..0e763a4507 100644
--- a/tests/qtest/libqtest.h
+++ b/tests/qtest/libqtest.h
@@ -351,6 +351,16 @@ void qtest_module_load(QTestState *s, const char *prefix, const char *libname);
*/
bool qtest_get_irq(QTestState *s, int num);
+
+/**
+ * qtest_get_irq_counter:
+ * @s: #QTestState instance to operate on.
+ * @irq_num: Interrupt to observe.
+ *
+ * Returns: The number of times @irq_num got triggered (raised).
+ */
+uint64_t qtest_get_irq_trigger_counter(QTestState *s, int irq_num);
+
/**
* qtest_irq_intercept_in:
* @s: #QTestState instance to operate on.
This change addresses the current QTest limitation. Is it acceptable?
Cheers,
Gustavo
On 10/11/2023 04.40, Gustavo Romero wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm writing a test for a device that has one IRQ output line > that is toggled (raised then lowered) by the device to trigger > a CPU interrupt. > > Afaics the QTest framework does not provide a way to capture > when an output line is raised because the API functions, e.g. > qtest_get_irq(), read the current state of the intercepted > IRQ lines, which is already low when the function is called, > since the line is toggled by the device. > > I'd like to introduce a new API function to address this case, > called qtest_get_irq_trigger_counter(): ... > This change addresses the current QTest limitation. Is it acceptable? Hi Gustavo, that sounds reasonable to me. Thomas
On 11/10/23 3:16 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 10/11/2023 04.40, Gustavo Romero wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> I'm writing a test for a device that has one IRQ output line >> that is toggled (raised then lowered) by the device to trigger >> a CPU interrupt. >> >> Afaics the QTest framework does not provide a way to capture >> when an output line is raised because the API functions, e.g. >> qtest_get_irq(), read the current state of the intercepted >> IRQ lines, which is already low when the function is called, >> since the line is toggled by the device. >> >> I'd like to introduce a new API function to address this case, >> called qtest_get_irq_trigger_counter(): > ... >> This change addresses the current QTest limitation. Is it acceptable? > > Hi Gustavo, > > that sounds reasonable to me. Thanks, Thomas! I've posted the patch here: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-11/msg02867.html Cheers, Gustavo
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.