lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 16:24:35 +0200 From: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com> To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@...ux.ibm.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>, Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> Cc: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] KVM: s390: selftests: Use TAP interface in the memop test On 14/06/2022 12.38, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote: > On 5/31/22 12:15, Thomas Huth wrote: >> The memop test currently does not have any output (unless one of the >> TEST_ASSERT statement fails), so it's hard to say for a user whether >> a certain new sub-test has been included in the binary or not. Let's >> make this a little bit more user-friendly and include some TAP output >> via the kselftests.h interface. >> >> Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com> >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 77 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c >> index 49f26f544127..e704c6fa5758 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c >> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ >> > > [...] > >> int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >> { >> - int memop_cap, extension_cap; >> + int memop_cap, extension_cap, idx; >> >> setbuf(stdout, NULL); /* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */ >> >> + ksft_print_header(); >> + >> memop_cap = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_S390_MEM_OP); >> extension_cap = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_S390_MEM_OP_EXTENSION); >> if (!memop_cap) { >> - print_skip("CAP_S390_MEM_OP not supported"); >> - exit(KSFT_SKIP); >> + ksft_exit_skip("CAP_S390_MEM_OP not supported.\n"); >> } >> >> - test_copy(); >> - if (extension_cap > 0) { >> - test_copy_key(); >> - test_copy_key_storage_prot_override(); >> - test_copy_key_fetch_prot(); >> - test_copy_key_fetch_prot_override(); >> - test_errors_key(); >> - test_termination(); >> - test_errors_key_storage_prot_override(); >> - test_errors_key_fetch_prot_override_not_enabled(); >> - test_errors_key_fetch_prot_override_enabled(); >> - } else { >> - print_skip("storage key memop extension not supported"); >> + ksft_set_plan(ARRAY_SIZE(testlist)); >> + >> + for (idx = 0; idx < ARRAY_SIZE(testlist); idx++) { >> + if (testlist[idx].extension >= extension_cap) { > > This is reversed, should be > > if (testlist[idx].extension <= extension_cap) { > or > if (extension_cap >= testlist[idx].extension) { Drat! The patch is already in Paolo's queue ... could you please send a patch to fix this, so that Paolo can either squash it (not sure whether that's still feasible) or queue it, too? > I'd prefer the latter. Me too. Thanks, Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists