Tarun Sahu <[email protected]> writes: > Add guest_memfd_preservation_test to verify that KVM VM state and guest > memory backed by guest_memfd are preserved across a kexec reboot via Live > Update Orchestrator (LUO). > > This test includes multiple tests > - (A) Test to preserve non-guest_memfd, non-memfd which must fail (/dev/null) > - (B) Test to preserve guest_memfd with no INIT_SHARED flag which must fail > - (C) Test to allocate the guest_memfd memory after preservation because > preservation makes the guest_memfd frozen. Which must fail as well. > - (D) Test to verify guest_memfd with INIT_SHARED flag preservation across > kexec: Below is the details of stages in this test. >
I think we should split this into multiple patches, where each patch introduces 1 test. > > [...snip...] > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_preservation_test.c > @@ -0,0 +1,357 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +/* > + * Copyright (C) 2026, Google LLC. > + * > + * Author: Tarun Sahu <[email protected]> > + * > + * Test for VM and guest_memfd preservation across kexec (Live Update) via > LUO. > + * > + * NOTE: This is a MANUAL test and is excluded from automated CI/testing > + * frameworks because Stage 1 daemonizes into the background to pin resources > + * and requires a human operator to manually trigger kexec before Stage 2 > + * is executed. Running Stage 1 automatically would leak the background > daemon > + * and cause CI runners to falsely interpret it as a passed test. > + * Usually there aren't many printfs in tests, but since this is a MANUAL test, maybe that's ok? Would like to know what Sean thinks of this, and printfs in general. > > [...snip...] >
