Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] tests/tcg/ppc64le: paddi tests

[Matheus K. Ferst]

On 16/04/2021 00:52, David Gibson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 06:41:35PM -0300, matheus.ferst@eldorado.org.br wrote:
> > From: Matheus Ferst <matheus.ferst@eldorado.org.br>
> >
> > Based-on: <20210413211129.457272-1-luis.pires@eldorado.org.br>
>
> First things first: it's unclear to me if this is testing stuff that's
> already merged, or it's speculative tests for the in-progress prefixed
> instruction stuff.  i.e. If these tests are applied right now, will
> they pass?

GCC-10 images can be used to test already merged Power10 instructions, 
such as brh/brw/brd, but I haven't writen tests for them (yet?). Both 
tests are targeting paddi, whose implementation is in-progress, so 
applying them now will fail. Maybe I should split the series? Patch 1 
for now, and Patch 2 and 3 when paddi are merged?

> > This series adds gcc-10 based images to enable the build of tests with Power10
> > instructions. Then two tests for paddi are added:
> > - The first one checks a weird behavior observed on POWER10 Functional Simulator
> >    1.1.0, where the 34-bit immediate is treated as a 32-bits one;
> > - The second one exercises the R=1 path of paddi, where CIA is used instead of 
> > RA.
> >    The test is failing with the current implementation because we use cpu_nip,
> >    which is not updated all the time. Luis already has the fix, it should be
> >    applied on the next version of his patch series.
> >
> > The main reason to submit this patch as an RFC first is the docker part. I would
> > lie if I tell you that I understand half of what is going on there.
> >   - 'make docker-test-tcg' fails, but apparently on unrelated things;
> >   - 'make docker-run-test-tcg@debian-ppc64el-cross' passes, but it looks
> >     like the test is skipped?
> >   - 'make check-tcg' runs the test and passes (with the fix in place for the
> >     second).
>
> What sort of host was that on?  Unfortunately 'make check-tcg' has
> been broken on a POWER host for some time, and I've never had time to
> look into it.

I'm testing on amd64, but I can also try on ppc64le.

> > Finally, get_maintainer.pl found no maintainers for
> > tests/tcg/ppc64{,le}/Makefile.target. Would it be Mr. Gibson?
>
> Uh... sorta?  I also don't know much about what's going on here, but
> I'm probably maintainer by default.

So, should I update MAINTAINERS in this series?

--
Matheus K. Ferst
Instituto de Pesquisas ELDORADO <http://www.eldorado.org.br/>
Analista de Software Júnior
Aviso Legal - Disclaimer <https://www.eldorado.org.br/disclaimer.html>