There is no vmx_pi_mmio_test file. Remove it to get rid of error while
creation of selftest archive:

rsync: [sender] link_stat "/kselftest/kvm/x86_64/vmx_pi_mmio_test" failed: No such file or directory (2)
rsync error: some files/attrs were not transferred (see previous errors) (code 23) at main.c(1333) [sender=3.2.3]

Fixes: 6a58150859fd ("selftest: KVM: Add intra host migration tests")
Reported-by: "kernelci.org bot" <bot@kernelci.org>
Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
---
Changes in V2:
Edited the subject line
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
index d61286208e242..b970397f725c7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
@@ -82,7 +82,6 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/tsc_msrs_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/vmx_pmu_msrs_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/xen_shinfo_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/xen_vmcall_test
-TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/vmx_pi_mmio_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/sev_migrate_tests
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/amx_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += access_tracking_perf_test
-- 
2.30.2

On 2/10/22 10:23 AM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> There is no vmx_pi_mmio_test file. Remove it to get rid of error while
> creation of selftest archive:
> 
> rsync: [sender] link_stat "/kselftest/kvm/x86_64/vmx_pi_mmio_test" failed: No such file or directory (2)
> rsync error: some files/attrs were not transferred (see previous errors) (code 23) at main.c(1333) [sender=3.2.3]
> 
> Fixes: 6a58150859fd ("selftest: KVM: Add intra host migration tests")
> Reported-by: "kernelci.org bot" <bot@kernelci.org>
> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
> ---
> Changes in V2:
> Edited the subject line
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 1 -
>   1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> index d61286208e242..b970397f725c7 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> @@ -82,7 +82,6 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/tsc_msrs_test
>   TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/vmx_pmu_msrs_test
>   TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/xen_shinfo_test
>   TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/xen_vmcall_test
> -TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/vmx_pi_mmio_test
>   TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/sev_migrate_tests
>   TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/amx_test
>   TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += access_tracking_perf_test
> 

I am fine with the change itself. For this patch:

Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

However, are we missing a vmx_pi_mmio_test and that test needs to be added.

Just in case the test didn't make it into the 6a58150859fd and the intent
was to add it - hence the Makefile addition? This can be addressed in
another patch. Just want to make sure we aren't missing a test.

Peter Gonda can confirm perhaps?

thanks,
-- Shuah

On 2/10/22 19:02, Shuah Khan wrote:
> 
> I am fine with the change itself. For this patch:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
> 
> However, are we missing a vmx_pi_mmio_test and that test needs to be added.
> 
> Just in case the test didn't make it into the 6a58150859fd and the intent
> was to add it - hence the Makefile addition? This can be addressed in
> another patch. Just want to make sure we aren't missing a test.

This was probably a rebase resolution issue.  The vmx_pi_mmio_test fails 
in the mainline tree, and is lingering in my tree together with the fix 
because somebody promised a better fix for it.  I included the 
TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 line by mistake when rebasing Peter Gonda's test 
below vmx_pi_mmio_test.

Thanks for the fix,

Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>

Paolo

On 2/10/22 11:56 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 2/10/22 19:02, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>
>> I am fine with the change itself. For this patch:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
>>
>> However, are we missing a vmx_pi_mmio_test and that test needs to be added.
>>
>> Just in case the test didn't make it into the 6a58150859fd and the intent
>> was to add it - hence the Makefile addition? This can be addressed in
>> another patch. Just want to make sure we aren't missing a test.
> 
> This was probably a rebase resolution issue.  The vmx_pi_mmio_test fails in the mainline tree, and is lingering in my tree together with the fix because somebody promised a better fix for it.  I included the TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 line by mistake when rebasing Peter Gonda's test below vmx_pi_mmio_test.
> 
> Thanks for the fix,
> 
> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> 

Paolo,

Thank you for explaining the discrepancy. Would you like take
this through your tree? This patch depends on

commit: de1956f48543e90f94b1194395f33140898b39b2

thanks,
-- Shuah

On 2/11/22 18:34, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 2/10/22 11:56 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 2/10/22 19:02, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>
>>> I am fine with the change itself. For this patch:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
>>>
>>> However, are we missing a vmx_pi_mmio_test and that test needs to be 
>>> added.
>>>
>>> Just in case the test didn't make it into the 6a58150859fd and the 
>>> intent
>>> was to add it - hence the Makefile addition? This can be addressed in
>>> another patch. Just want to make sure we aren't missing a test.
>>
>> This was probably a rebase resolution issue.  The vmx_pi_mmio_test 
>> fails in the mainline tree, and is lingering in my tree together with 
>> the fix because somebody promised a better fix for it.  I included the 
>> TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 line by mistake when rebasing Peter Gonda's test 
>> below vmx_pi_mmio_test.
>>
>> Thanks for the fix,
>>
>> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>>
> 
> Paolo,
> 
> Thank you for explaining the discrepancy. Would you like take
> this through your tree? This patch depends on
> 
> commit: de1956f48543e90f94b1194395f33140898b39b2

Yes, of course.  Queued now.

Paolo