[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9cf7f693-bc6a-415b-99c3-f6c59b871c4f@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 10:40:45 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: kernel@...labora.com, "Chang S . Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] selftests: x86: vdso_restorer: remove manual counting
of pass/fail tests
On 7/12/24 01:30, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> Use kselftest wrapper to mark tests pass/fail instead of manually
> counting.
You care combining two changes in the patch.
This is needed to return correct exit status. This also
> improves readability and mainability.
Spelling - "mainability" - checkpatch would have helped you
catch this.
The change to return the correct error fine and but not the
change thaT ADDS DUPLICATE tap header.
>
> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c | 20 +++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c
> index fe99f24341554..8e173d71291f6 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <syscall.h>
> #include <sys/syscall.h>
> +#include "../kselftest.h"
>
> /* Open-code this -- the headers are too messy to easily use them. */
> struct real_sigaction {
> @@ -44,9 +45,10 @@ static void handler_without_siginfo(int sig)
>
> int main()
> {
> - int nerrs = 0;
> struct real_sigaction sa;
>
> + ksft_print_header();
The problem with adding this header here is when
make kselftest TARGETS=vDSO is run there will be
duplicate TAP 13 headers.
> +
> void *vdso = dlopen("linux-vdso.so.1",
> RTLD_LAZY | RTLD_LOCAL | RTLD_NOLOAD);
> if (!vdso)
> @@ -57,6 +59,8 @@ int main()
> return 0;
> }
>
> + ksft_set_plan(2);
> +
> memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(sa));
> sa.handler = handler_with_siginfo;
> sa.flags = SA_SIGINFO;
> @@ -69,12 +73,7 @@ int main()
>
> raise(SIGUSR1);
>
> - if (handler_called) {
> - printf("[OK]\tSA_SIGINFO handler returned successfully\n");
> - } else {
> - printf("[FAIL]\tSA_SIGINFO handler was not called\n");
> - nerrs++;
> - }
> + ksft_test_result(handler_called, "SA_SIGINFO handler returned\n");
>
> printf("[RUN]\tRaise a signal, !SA_SIGINFO, sa.restorer == NULL\n");
>
> @@ -86,10 +85,5 @@ int main()
>
> raise(SIGUSR1);
>
> - if (handler_called) {
> - printf("[OK]\t!SA_SIGINFO handler returned successfully\n");
> - } else {
> - printf("[FAIL]\t!SA_SIGINFO handler was not called\n");
> - nerrs++;
> - }
> + ksft_test_result(handler_called, "SA_SIGINFO handler returned\n");
> }
thanks,
-- Shuah
Powered by blists - more mailing lists