Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] Fix ARM domcreate

["Orzel, Michal" <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>]

On 14-Oct-26 13:37, Julian Vetter wrote:
> On 10/13/26 2:28 PM, Orzel, Michal wrote:
>>
>> On 12-Oct-26 15:36, Julian Vetter wrote:
>>> Hello Michal and Anthony,
>>> thank you for the reviews and acks! Michal, I have addressed your
>>> remaining remarks on the "xen/arm: report clock_frequency via sysctl
>>> physinfo, not createdomain" patch. The golang bindings are regenerated
>>> for the new arm_clock_frequency_hz physinfo field, and
>>> alloc_domaininfo() no longer references the removed clock_frequency
>>> field. Apart from that I have collected the Acked-by/Reviewed-by tags.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Julian Vetter <julian.vetter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> I was about to commit the series but I found out that some tests like
>> test-mem-claim and possibly others still pass gic_version=0 which will cause 
>> the
>> domain creation to fail. You need to update the tests.
> 
> Yes, thank you. I didn't see this. I have fixed the tests, and ran them 
> on a QEMU setup. 2 of them now pass the domain creation at least just 
> like on master (1 doesn't work on QEMU because there is no IOMMU 
> emulation?!):
> 
> ```
> @@@ RUN test-mem-claim
> Memory claims tests
> Free pages: 254208, Oustanding claims: 0
>    Created d1
>    Failed to populate physmap domain: 16 - Resource busy
> @@@ RESULT test-mem-claim rc=1
> @@@ RUN test-paging-mempool
> Paging mempool tests
> (XEN) [   28.386587] common/domain.c:845: IOMMU requested but not available
>    Skip: 22 - Invalid argument
> @@@ RESULT test-paging-mempool rc=0
> @@@ RUN test-resource
> XENMEM_acquire_resource tests
> Test ARM
>    Created d3
>    Failed to populate physmap domain: 16 - Resource busy
> @@@ RESULT test-resource rc=1
> @@@ ALL DONE
> ```
> 
> But, unfortunately, these tests seem broken on ARM even on master, 
> because on ARM domains start with an empty P2M pool, and since these 
> tests call xc_domain_create() without setting the pool size first, they 
> fail on the populate physmap call. I'm not sure how to proceed on this. 
> Should I fix these tests in their entirety or leave this for another 
> patch set? Thank you for your advice.
In that case, no need to fix these tests in this series.

> 
>>
>>>
>>> Andrew Cooper (1):
>>>    ARM/sysctl: Expose the supported guest GIC modes in physinfo
>>>
>>> Julian Vetter (4):
>>>    tools/arm: choose GIC version explicitly instead of relying on
>>>      GIC_NATIVE
>>>    xen/arm: remove XEN_DOMCTL_CONFIG_GIC_NATIVE from the ABI
>>>    xen/arm: report clock_frequency via sysctl physinfo, not createdomain
>>>    xen: make config argument const
>> Here you are still missing tags from e.g. RISCV I think.
>>
>> ~Michal
>>
> 
> Thank you again for pointing this out! Unfortunately neither PPC nor 
> RISC-V have a formal maintainer defined in the MAINTAINERS file, so it's 
> actually "THE REST" responsible(s), which is also you ;-) For RISC-V I 
> have asked internally to do a review, but this will only add a 
> 'Reviewed-By' not a full 'Ack'. So, not sure what to do about it.
We usually ask Oleksii for an ack. I can see Baptiste added one, so I'm good.
The series is ready to be committed. I'll do so later on this week.

~Michal