On 20 July 2018 at 02:22, Jia He <hejia...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Peter。 Thanks for the comments > > On 7/19/2018 8:41 PM, Peter Maydell Wrote: >> On 19 July 2018 at 04:11, Jia He <hejia...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> In scripts/arch-run.bash of kvm-unit-tests, it will check the qemu >>> output log with: >>> if [ -z "$(echo "$errors" | grep -vi warning)" ]; then >>> >>> Thus without the warning prefix, all of the test fail. >>> >>> Since it is not unrecoverable error in kvm_arm_its_reset for >>> current implementation, downgrading the report from error to >>> warn makes sense. >> >> I think the counterargument would be that this should report >> an error, because you just asked the device to do something >> that it doesn't support (ie to do a clean reset). Since the >> device isn't going to behave correctly, the tests should fail, >> and the way to make them pass is to upgrade to a kernel that >> implements the device correctly (by implementing the necessary >> feature). >> >> But we could maybe move to warn_report() here -- I'm not >> sure what our rules are for what counts as an error and >> what counts as a warning. > I reviewed the other error_report in qemu. Some of them are followed > by exit(), but the rest are not. So it seems there is no definite > rules for error_report. > > IMO, the best resolution is to change the output grep search criteria. > But it is difficult for kvm-unit-tests to identify whether it is an > error without exit() or a warning. The fastest resolution is moving > error_report to warn_report.
Well, as I say, this implementation of the ITS *should* fail tests -- it doesn't behave to spec. The fastest resolution is for you to upgrade your host kernel to one that has the bugfix :-) thanks -- PMM
