On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 4:18 PM Andrew Jones ajones@ventanamicro.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 09:42:58PM +0800, Haibo Xu wrote:
Only do the get/set tests on present and blessed registers since we don't know the capabilities of any new ones.
Suggested-by: Andrew Jones ajones@ventanamicro.com Signed-off-by: Haibo Xu haibo1.xu@intel.com Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones ajones@ventanamicro.com
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c | 29 ++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c index c61090806007..74fb6f6fdd09 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c @@ -49,6 +49,10 @@ extern int vcpu_configs_n; for_each_reg_filtered(i) \ if (!find_reg(blessed_reg, blessed_n, reg_list->reg[i]))
+#define for_each_present_blessed_reg(i) \
for ((i) = 0; (i) < blessed_n; ++(i)) \if (find_reg(reg_list->reg, reg_list->n, blessed_reg[i]))I just realized this is backwards. We need 'i' to index reg_list->reg in the body of the loop. That means we need to write this as
#define for_each_present_blessed_reg(i) \ for_each_reg(i) \ if (find_reg(blessed_reg, blessed_n, reg_list->reg[i]))
(Which, in hindsight, makes sense since we're replacing a for_each_reg() loop.)
Sure, I will update it in v6.
Thanks!
Thanks, drew