qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] qtest: add a reproducer for LP#1878642


From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qtest: add a reproducer for LP#1878642
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 18:31:08 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.0

On 2/16/21 4:00 PM, Alexander Bulekov wrote:
> On 210216 1325, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 at 16:35, Alexander Bulekov <alxndr@bu.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1878642
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Bulekov <alxndr@bu.edu>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Based-on: <20200717151705.18611-1-f4bug@amsat.org>
>>>
>>> The added testcase will fail, unless this ^^^ patch is applied.
>>>
>>>  tests/qtest/fuzz-test.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tests/qtest/fuzz-test.c b/tests/qtest/fuzz-test.c
>>> index 2f38bb1ec2..9cb4c42bde 100644
>>> --- a/tests/qtest/fuzz-test.c
>>> +++ b/tests/qtest/fuzz-test.c
>>> @@ -34,6 +34,19 @@ static void test_lp1878263_megasas_zero_iov_cnt(void)
>>>      qtest_quit(s);
>>>  }
>>>
>>> +static void test_lp1878642_pci_bus_get_irq_level_assert(void)
>>> +{
>>> +    QTestState *s;
>>> +
>>> +    s = qtest_init("-M pc-q35-5.0 "
>>> +                   "-nographic -monitor none -serial none "
>>> +                   "-d guest_errors -trace pci*");
>>> +
>>> +    qtest_outl(s, 0xcf8, 0x8400f841);
>>> +    qtest_outl(s, 0xcfc, 0xebed205d);
>>> +    qtest_outl(s, 0x5d02, 0xebed205d);
>>> +}
>>
>> Hi; I just noticed this, but why does this test case pass
>> "-trace pci*" to QEMU? It doesn't look like it does anything to
>> try to capture the trace output, which thus winds up just going
>> to the stdout/stderr of the "make check" run. Similarly I'm not
>> sure '-d guest_errors' is going to do anything helpful unless
>> you take steps to capture the output and check it.

I suppose Alex took it from commit 4177b062fc5 ("hw/isa/lpc_ich9:
Ignore reserved/invalid SCI IRQ") where it is used to show the
problem the fuzzer reproducer triggers. Not useful in regular testing.

> Ah, I sometimes include those in the initial report, if the device has
> trace-events. I can remove this from fuzz-test.c, if it is slowing
> things down.

I doubt it is slowing things down, but it probably make it harder to
find other problems (I suppose Peter got confused when looking for
another failure and found these traces).




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]