[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2f157493-02ed-4bc8-6624-b7d077c0d5af@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 11:20:23 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "Shetty, Kalpana" <kalpana.shetty@....com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] selftests/vm: Add protection_keys tests to run_vmtests
On 6/14/22 6:15 AM, Shetty, Kalpana wrote:
>
> On 6/14/2022 3:14 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 6/10/22 3:07 AM, Kalpana Shetty wrote:
>>> Adding "protected_keys" tests to "run_vmtests.sh" would help out to run all VM related tests
>>> from a single shell script.
>>>
>>
>> Makes sense - can you explain why you can't just run
>> protection_keys_32 without checks?
>
> Yes; we can run protection_keys_32 without check.
>
>
>> Why are you checking for VADDR64?
>
> The check is added to ensure if the system is in 64-bit mode before executing 64-bit binary.
>
>
Okay. protection_keys_32 will only be built on 32-bit system and.
protection_keys_64 on 64-bit system.
Won't it be better to check if binary exists and run either _32 or
_64 instead of checking for VADDR64?
thanks,
-- Shuah
Powered by blists - more mailing lists