- Linux-kselftest-mirror - lists.linaro.org

[PATCH] kunit: tool: tweak error message when no KTAP found

by Daniel Latypov

We currently tell people we "couldn't find any KTAP output" with no indication as to what this might mean. After this patch, we get: $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py parse /dev/null ============================================================ [ERROR] Test: <missing>: Could not find any KTAP output. Did any KUnit tests run? ============================================================ Testing complete. Ran 0 tests: errors: 1 Note: we could try and generate a more verbose message like > Please check .kunit/test.log to see the raw kernel output. or the like, but we'd need to know what the build dir was to know where test.log actually lives. This patch tries to make a more minimal improvement. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov(a)google.com> --- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py | 2 +- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py index a56c75a973b5..d0ed5dd5cfc4 100644 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py @@ -782,7 +782,7 @@ def parse_run_tests(kernel_output: Iterable[str]) -> Test: test = Test() if not lines: test.name = '<missing>' - test.add_error('could not find any KTAP output!') + test.add_error('Could not find any KTAP output. Did any KUnit tests run?') test.status = TestStatus.FAILURE_TO_PARSE_TESTS else: test = parse_test(lines, 0, []) diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py index 90c65b072be9..84a08cf07242 100755 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py @@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase): with open(crash_log) as file: result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests( kunit_parser.extract_tap_lines(file.readlines())) - print_mock.assert_any_call(StrContains('could not find any KTAP output!')) + print_mock.assert_any_call(StrContains('Could not find any KTAP output.')) print_mock.stop() self.assertEqual(0, len(result.subtests)) self.assertEqual(result.counts.errors, 1) @@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ class KUnitMainTest(unittest.TestCase): self.assertEqual(e.exception.code, 1) self.assertEqual(self.linux_source_mock.build_reconfig.call_count, 1) self.assertEqual(self.linux_source_mock.run_kernel.call_count, 1) - self.print_mock.assert_any_call(StrContains('could not find any KTAP output!')) + self.print_mock.assert_any_call(StrContains('Could not find any KTAP output.')) def test_exec_no_tests(self): self.linux_source_mock.run_kernel = mock.Mock(return_value=['TAP version 14', '1..0']) base-commit: 870f63b7cd78d0055902d839a60408f7428b4e84 -- 2.38.1.431.g37b22c650d-goog

2 years, 7 months

2
1
0 0

[PATCH] kunit: remove KUNIT_INIT_MEM_ASSERTION macro

by Daniel Latypov

Commit 870f63b7cd78 ("kunit: eliminate KUNIT_INIT_*_ASSERT_STRUCT macros") removed all the other macros of this type. But it raced with commit b8a926bea8b1 ("kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros"), which added another instance. Remove KUNIT_INIT_MEM_ASSERTION and just use the generic KUNIT_INIT_ASSERT macro instead. Rename the `size` arg to avoid conflicts by appending a "_" (like we did in the previous commit). Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov(a)google.com> --- include/kunit/assert.h | 7 ------- include/kunit/test.h | 12 ++++++------ 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/kunit/assert.h b/include/kunit/assert.h index 43144cfddc19..24c2b9fa61e8 100644 --- a/include/kunit/assert.h +++ b/include/kunit/assert.h @@ -192,13 +192,6 @@ void kunit_binary_str_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert, const struct va_format *message, struct string_stream *stream); -#define KUNIT_INIT_MEM_ASSERT_STRUCT(text_, left_val, right_val, size_) { \ - .text = text_, \ - .left_value = left_val, \ - .right_value = right_val, \ - .size = size_ \ -} - /** * struct kunit_mem_assert - An expectation/assertion that compares two * memory blocks. diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h index d7f60e8aab30..4666a4d199ea 100644 --- a/include/kunit/test.h +++ b/include/kunit/test.h @@ -666,13 +666,13 @@ do { \ left, \ op, \ right, \ - size, \ + size_, \ fmt, \ ...) \ do { \ const void *__left = (left); \ const void *__right = (right); \ - const size_t __size = (size); \ + const size_t __size = (size_); \ static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { \ .operation = #op, \ .left_text = #left, \ @@ -686,10 +686,10 @@ do { \ assert_type, \ kunit_mem_assert, \ kunit_mem_assert_format, \ - KUNIT_INIT_MEM_ASSERT_STRUCT(&__text, \ - __left, \ - __right, \ - __size), \ + KUNIT_INIT_ASSERT(.text = &__text, \ + .left_value = __left, \ + .right_value = __right, \ + .size = __size), \ fmt, \ ##__VA_ARGS__); \ } while (0) base-commit: 870f63b7cd78d0055902d839a60408f7428b4e84 -- 2.38.1.431.g37b22c650d-goog

2 years, 7 months

2
1
0 0

[PATCH v3 1/3] Documentation: KUnit: make usage.rst a superset of tips.rst, remove duplication

by Daniel Latypov

usage.rst had most of the content of the tips.rst page copied over. But it's missing https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.0/dev-tools/kunit/tips.html#customizing-… Copy it over so we can retire tips.rst w/o losing content. And in that process, it also gained a duplicate section about how KUNIT_ASSERT_*() exit the test case early. Remove that. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov(a)google.com> Reviewed-by: Sadiya Kazi <sadiyakazi(a)google.com> --- Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst | 49 ++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst index 2737863ef365..b0a6c3bc0eeb 100644 --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst @@ -118,6 +118,37 @@ expectation could crash the test case. `ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(...)` allows us to bail out of the test case if the appropriate conditions are not satisfied to complete the test. +Customizing error messages +-------------------------- + +Each of the ``KUNIT_EXPECT`` and ``KUNIT_ASSERT`` macros have a ``_MSG`` +variant. These take a format string and arguments to provide additional +context to the automatically generated error messages. + +.. code-block:: c + + char some_str[41]; + generate_sha1_hex_string(some_str); + + /* Before. Not easy to tell why the test failed. */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, strlen(some_str), 40); + + /* After. Now we see the offending string. */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, strlen(some_str), 40, "some_str='%s'", some_str); + +Alternatively, one can take full control over the error message by using +``KUNIT_FAIL()``, e.g. + +.. code-block:: c + + /* Before */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, some_setup_function(), 0); + + /* After: full control over the failure message. */ + if (some_setup_function()) + KUNIT_FAIL(test, "Failed to setup thing for testing"); + + Test Suites ~~~~~~~~~~~ @@ -546,24 +577,6 @@ By reusing the same ``cases`` array from above, we can write the test as a {} }; -Exiting Early on Failed Expectations ------------------------------------- - -We can use ``KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ`` to mark the test as failed and continue -execution. In some cases, it is unsafe to continue. We can use the -``KUNIT_ASSERT`` variant to exit on failure. - -.. code-block:: c - - void example_test_user_alloc_function(struct kunit *test) - { - void *object = alloc_some_object_for_me(); - - /* Make sure we got a valid pointer back. */ - KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, object); - do_something_with_object(object); - } - Allocating Memory ----------------- base-commit: 870f63b7cd78d0055902d839a60408f7428b4e84 -- 2.38.1.431.g37b22c650d-goog

2 years, 7 months

2
4
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 08/18] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for release_reference()

by Sasha Levin

From: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 475244f5e06beeda7b557d9dde46a5f439bf3379 ] Add a test case to ensure that released pointer registers will not be leaked into the map. Before fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg FAIL Unexpected success to load! verification time 67 usec stack depth 4 processed 23 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2 peak_states 2 mark_read 1 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED After fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel(a)iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221103093440.3161-2-liulin063@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- .../selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c index 006b5bd99c08..525d810b10b8 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c @@ -901,3 +901,39 @@ .result_unpriv = REJECT, .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func", }, +{ + "reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg", + .insns = { + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -4), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_reserve), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_discard), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_8, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN() + }, + .fixup_map_array_48b = { 4 }, + .fixup_map_ringbuf = { 11 }, + .result = ACCEPT, + .result_unpriv = REJECT, + .errstr_unpriv = "R8 !read_ok" +}, -- 2.35.1

2 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.15 11/27] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for release_reference()

by Sasha Levin

From: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 475244f5e06beeda7b557d9dde46a5f439bf3379 ] Add a test case to ensure that released pointer registers will not be leaked into the map. Before fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg FAIL Unexpected success to load! verification time 67 usec stack depth 4 processed 23 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2 peak_states 2 mark_read 1 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED After fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel(a)iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221103093440.3161-2-liulin063@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- .../selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c index 3b6ee009c00b..4a768b130d61 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c @@ -905,3 +905,39 @@ .result_unpriv = REJECT, .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func", }, +{ + "reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg", + .insns = { + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -4), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_reserve), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_discard), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_8, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN() + }, + .fixup_map_array_48b = { 4 }, + .fixup_map_ringbuf = { 11 }, + .result = ACCEPT, + .result_unpriv = REJECT, + .errstr_unpriv = "R8 !read_ok" +}, -- 2.35.1

2 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.0 16/44] selftests/net: give more time to udpgro bg processes to complete startup

by Sasha Levin

From: Adrien Thierry <athierry(a)redhat.com> [ Upstream commit cdb525ca92b196f8916102b62431aa0d9a644ff2 ] In some conditions, background processes in udpgro don't have enough time to set up the sockets. When foreground processes start, this results in the test failing with "./udpgso_bench_tx: sendmsg: Connection refused". For instance, this happens from time to time on a Qualcomm SA8540P SoC running CentOS Stream 9. To fix this, increase the time given to background processes to complete the startup before foreground processes start. Signed-off-by: Adrien Thierry <athierry(a)redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem(a)davemloft.net> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh | 4 ++-- tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh | 2 +- 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh index ebbd0b282432..6a443ca3cd3a 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ run_one() { echo "failed" & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} ret=$? wait $(jobs -p) @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ run_one_2sock() { echo "failed" & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} -p 12345 sleep 0.1 # first UDP GSO socket should be closed at this point diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh index fad2d1a71cac..8a1109a545db 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ run_one() { ip netns exec "${PEER_NS}" ./udpgso_bench_rx -t ${rx_args} -r & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} } diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh index 832c738cc3c2..7fe85ba51075 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ run_one() { ip netns exec "${PEER_NS}" ./udpgso_bench_rx ${rx_args} -r & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} } -- 2.35.1

2 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.0 15/44] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for release_reference()

by Sasha Levin

From: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 475244f5e06beeda7b557d9dde46a5f439bf3379 ] Add a test case to ensure that released pointer registers will not be leaked into the map. Before fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg FAIL Unexpected success to load! verification time 67 usec stack depth 4 processed 23 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2 peak_states 2 mark_read 1 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED After fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel(a)iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221103093440.3161-2-liulin063@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- .../selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c index 57a83d763ec1..6dc65b2501ed 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c @@ -905,3 +905,39 @@ .result_unpriv = REJECT, .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func", }, +{ + "reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg", + .insns = { + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -4), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_reserve), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_discard), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_8, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN() + }, + .fixup_map_array_48b = { 4 }, + .fixup_map_ringbuf = { 11 }, + .result = ACCEPT, + .result_unpriv = REJECT, + .errstr_unpriv = "R8 !read_ok" +}, -- 2.35.1

2 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.0 09/44] selftests/net: don't tests batched TCP io_uring zc

by Sasha Levin

From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 9921d5013a6e51892623bf2f1c5b49eaecda55ac ] It doesn't make sense batch submitting io_uring requests to a single TCP socket without linking or some other kind of ordering. Moreover, it causes spurious -EINTR fails due to interaction with task_work. Disable it for now and keep queue depth=1. Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence(a)gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/b547698d5938b1b1a898af1c260188d8546ded9a.16667008… Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe(a)kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh index 32aa6e9dacc2..9ac4456d48fc 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ if [[ "$#" -eq "0" ]]; then for IP in "${IPs[@]}"; do for mode in $(seq 1 3); do $0 "$IP" udp -m "$mode" -t 1 -n 32 - $0 "$IP" tcp -m "$mode" -t 1 -n 32 + $0 "$IP" tcp -m "$mode" -t 1 -n 1 done done -- 2.35.1

2 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: selftests: Build access_tracking_perf_test for arm64

by Oliver Upton

Does exactly what it says on the tin. Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan(a)redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton(a)linux.dev> --- tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile index 0172eb6cb6ee..4c0ff91a8964 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/psci_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vcpu_width_config TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_irq +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += access_tracking_perf_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += demand_paging_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += dirty_log_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += dirty_log_perf_test -- 2.38.1.584.g0f3c55d4c2-goog

2 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH v1] kselftest/arm64: Use preferred form for predicate load/stores

by Mark Brown

The preferred form of the str/ldr for predicate registers with an immediate of zero is to omit the zero, and the clang built in assembler rejects the zero immediate. Drop the immediate. Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie(a)kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S index b523c21c2278..acd5e9f3bc0b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ do_syscall: // Only set a non-zero FFR, test patterns must be zero since the // syscall should clear it - this lets us handle FA64. ldr x2, =ffr_in - ldr p0, [x2, #0] + ldr p0, [x2] ldr x2, [x2, #0] cbz x2, 2f wrffr p0.b @@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ do_syscall: cbz x2, 1f ldr x2, =ffr_out rdffr p0.b - str p0, [x2, #0] + str p0, [x2] 1: // Restore callee saved registers x19-x30 base-commit: 30a0b95b1335e12efef89dd78518ed3e4a71a763 -- 2.30.2

2 years, 7 months

3
3
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

Linux-kselftest-mirror