Skip to content

[catalogue] Fix VMSA register size and type mismatch#1763

Draft
diaolo01 wants to merge 1 commit intoherd:masterfrom
diaolo01:catalogue-vmsa
Draft

[catalogue] Fix VMSA register size and type mismatch#1763
diaolo01 wants to merge 1 commit intoherd:masterfrom
diaolo01:catalogue-vmsa

Conversation

@diaolo01
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This PR adresses register type mismatches in aarch64-vmsa tests:

  • fix pteval_t vs int register type mismatch
  • fix register size mismatches

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@relokin relokin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @diaolo01.

@maranget independently of the specifics of this change, do you have long term logs for aarch64-VMSA? Should we aim to preserve hashes here?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Along with this we should remove LDR+32. But I am not sure these set of tests should be here in the first place. I think these should be in herd/tests/instructions - if there is no such test there already.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@maranget maranget Apr 2, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The catalogue is also the test base for the web interface. We may want simple tests such as those to appear un the web interface.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I opted for keeping this test given Luc's comment and made the registers 64 bit instead to differentiate them from 32 bits tests.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FWIW, the feedback I get from users is that web and in particular the aarch64-VMSA is overwhelming and not as well curated as it could be. I think having 100s of tests doesn't help and having both a 64bit LDR and a 32bit LDR only makes the situation worse. If we want to maintain these tests for testing, and I am not sure we need to, I think we should create a shelf.py for regressions and a separate shelf.py for the web.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fair enough. If I am not mistaken the regression test driver can take an index file as argument.

@maranget
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

maranget commented Apr 2, 2026

Thanks @diaolo01.

@maranget independently of the specifics of this change, do you have long term logs for aarch64-VMSA? Should we aim to preserve hashes here?

Hi @relokin abd @diaolo01. There are no long term logs that depend on any test from the github. All runs are performed on copies taken a long time ago. So it is safe to change logs here as long as references are also changed, when appropriate.

@maranget
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

maranget commented Apr 2, 2026

Hi again @diaolo01 and @relokin. I have started the process of editing the tests, with the following aims

  • Suppress herd7 errors (there are some since PR [herd] Strict mem sizes #1588).
  • Suppress litmus7 warnings.
  • Remove all Hash metadata, as they are useless.

Then I noticed that some tests have already been fixed by merged PR #1762. Would you please rebase?

@maranget
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

maranget commented Apr 2, 2026

I have already fixed some tests here, commit 35b45c4. May I suggest cherry-picking this commit?

@diaolo01
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

diaolo01 commented Apr 2, 2026

Thank you @maranget, looks like we did some of the same work in parallel. Should I cherry-pick the rest of the changes on top of this commit?

@maranget
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

maranget commented Apr 2, 2026

If you mean that my commit has more changes than yours, yes please proceed.

@maranget
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

maranget commented Apr 3, 2026

Thank you @maranget, looks like we did some of the same work in parallel.

Hi @diaolo01. To avoid this I won't work on this PR unless you tell me you have finished...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants