Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Nov 2022 08:52:38 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Move testlist into main | From | Thomas Huth <> |
| |
On 17/11/2022 23.17, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote: > This allows checking if the necessary requirements for a test case are > met via an arbitrary expression. In particular, it is easy to check if > certain bits are set in the memop extension capability. > > Signed-off-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c | 132 +++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c > index 286185a59238..10f34c629cac 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c > @@ -690,87 +690,87 @@ static void test_errors(void) > kvm_vm_free(t.kvm_vm); > } > > -struct testdef { > - const char *name; > - void (*test)(void); > - int extension; > -} testlist[] = { > - { > - .name = "simple copy", > - .test = test_copy, > - }, > - { > - .name = "generic error checks", > - .test = test_errors, > - }, > - { > - .name = "copy with storage keys", > - .test = test_copy_key, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "copy with key storage protection override", > - .test = test_copy_key_storage_prot_override, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "copy with key fetch protection", > - .test = test_copy_key_fetch_prot, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "copy with key fetch protection override", > - .test = test_copy_key_fetch_prot_override, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "error checks with key", > - .test = test_errors_key, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "termination", > - .test = test_termination, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "error checks with key storage protection override", > - .test = test_errors_key_storage_prot_override, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "error checks without key fetch prot override", > - .test = test_errors_key_fetch_prot_override_not_enabled, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > - { > - .name = "error checks with key fetch prot override", > - .test = test_errors_key_fetch_prot_override_enabled, > - .extension = 1, > - }, > -}; > > int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > { > int extension_cap, idx; > > + setbuf(stdout, NULL); /* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */ > TEST_REQUIRE(kvm_has_cap(KVM_CAP_S390_MEM_OP)); > + extension_cap = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_S390_MEM_OP_EXTENSION); > > - setbuf(stdout, NULL); /* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */ > + struct testdef { > + const char *name; > + void (*test)(void); > + bool requirements_met; > + } testlist[] = { > + { > + .name = "simple copy", > + .test = test_copy, > + .requirements_met = true, > + }, > + { > + .name = "generic error checks", > + .test = test_errors, > + .requirements_met = true, > + }, > + { > + .name = "copy with storage keys", > + .test = test_copy_key, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "copy with key storage protection override", > + .test = test_copy_key_storage_prot_override, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "copy with key fetch protection", > + .test = test_copy_key_fetch_prot, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "copy with key fetch protection override", > + .test = test_copy_key_fetch_prot_override, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "error checks with key", > + .test = test_errors_key, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "termination", > + .test = test_termination, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "error checks with key storage protection override", > + .test = test_errors_key_storage_prot_override, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "error checks without key fetch prot override", > + .test = test_errors_key_fetch_prot_override_not_enabled, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0, > + }, > + { > + .name = "error checks with key fetch prot override", > + .test = test_errors_key_fetch_prot_override_enabled, > + .requirements_met = extension_cap > 0,
I wonder whether it would rather make sense to check for "extension_cap & 1" instead of "extension_cap > 0" ?
Anyway: Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
| |