On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 10:27:37AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 09:47:48 -0700 > David Matlack <dmatlack@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 4:21 PM David Matlack <dmatlack@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > This series introduces VFIO selftests, located in > > > tools/testing/selftests/vfio/. > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > I wanted to discuss how you would like to proceed with this series. > > > > The series is quite large, so one thing I was wondering is if you > > think it should be split up into separate series to make it easier to > > review and merge. Something like this: > > > > - Patches 01-08 + 30 (VFIO selftests library, some basic tests, and run script) > > - Patches 09-22 (driver framework) > > - Patches 23-28 (iommufd support) > > - Patches 31-33 (integration with KVM selftests) > > > > I also was curious about your thoughts on maintenance of VFIO > > selftests, since I don't think we discussed that in the RFC. I am > > happy to help maintain VFIO selftests in whatever way makes the most > > sense. For now I added tools/testing/selftests/vfio under the > > top-level VFIO section in MAINTAINERS (so you would be the maintainer) > > and then also added a separate section for VFIO selftests with myself > > as a Reviewer (see PATCH 01). Reviewer felt like a better choice than > > Maintainer for myself since I am new to VFIO upstream (I've primarily > > worked on KVM in the past). > > Hi David, > > There's a lot of potential here and I'd like to see it proceed. +1 too, I really lack time at the moment to do much with this but I'm half inclined to suggest Alex should say it should be merged in 6 weeks (to motivate any reviewing) and we can continue to work on it in-tree. As they are self tests I think there is alot more value in having the tests than having perfect tests. > Something that we should continue to try to improve is the automation. > These tests are often targeting a specific feature, so matching a > device to a unit test becomes a barrier to automated runs. I wonder if > we might be able to reach a point where the test runner can select > appropriate devices from a pool of devices specified via environment > variables. Makes a lot of sense to me! I'd just put Dave as the VFIO selftest co-maintainer though - a pennance for doing so much work :) Jason
