On Wed, 5 Jun 2024 07:39:53 -0700 Richard Henderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/4/24 14:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > From: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> > > > > Given this is a new configuration, there are affects on APIC, CEDT > > and DSDT, but the key elements are in SRAT (plus related data in > > HMAT). The configuration has node to exercise many different combinations. > > > > 0) CPUs + Memory > > 1) GI only > > 2) GP only > > 3) CPUS only > > 4) Memory only > > 5) CPUs + HP memory > > > > GI node, GP Node, Memory only node, hotplug memory > > only node, latency and bandwidth such that in Linux Access0 > > (any initiator) and Access1 (CPU initiators only) given different > > answers. Following cropped to remove details of each entry. > > > This fails testing: > > https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/jobs/7021105504 > > acpi-test: Warning! SRAT binary file mismatch. Actual [aml:/tmp/aml-GHR6O2], > Expected > [aml:tests/data/acpi/q35/SRAT.acpihmat-generic-x]. > See source file tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c for instructions on how to > update expected > files. > to see ASL diff between mismatched files install IASL, rebuild QEMU from > scratch and > re-run tests with V=1 environment variable set** > ERROR:../alt/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c:550:test_acpi_asl: assertion > failed: > (all_tables_match) > Bail out! ERROR:../alt/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c:550:test_acpi_asl: > assertion failed: > (all_tables_match) > Aborted (core dumped) > s390 and passes on an x86 host, so I guess an endian bug - any chance of a table dump from someone with access to an s390 host? This test covers some stuff that was previously missing tests so may be non trivial to spot. I'll play guess in the meantime. So far I'm not seeing anything that differs from existing ACPI table building code. Jonathan > > r~
