On 3/14/24 10:00 AM, Dev Jain wrote:
On 2/2/24 17:01, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
Conform the layout, informational and status messages to TAP. No functional change is intended other than the layout of output messages.
Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum usama.anjum@collabora.com
.../selftests/mm/virtual_address_range.c | 44 +++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/virtual_address_range.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/virtual_address_range.c index bae0ceaf95b13..7bcf8d48256a6 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/virtual_address_range.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/virtual_address_range.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <sys/mman.h> #include <sys/time.h> +#include "../kselftest.h" /* * Maximum address range mapped with a single mmap() @@ -68,23 +69,15 @@ static char *hind_addr(void) return (char *) (1UL << bits); } -static int validate_addr(char *ptr, int high_addr) +static void validate_addr(char *ptr, int high_addr) { unsigned long addr = (unsigned long) ptr; - if (high_addr) { - if (addr < HIGH_ADDR_MARK) { - printf("Bad address %lx\n", addr); - return 1; - } - return 0; - } + if (high_addr && addr < HIGH_ADDR_MARK) + ksft_exit_fail_msg("Bad address %lx\n", addr); - if (addr > HIGH_ADDR_MARK) { - printf("Bad address %lx\n", addr); - return 1; - } - return 0; + if (addr > HIGH_ADDR_MARK) + ksft_exit_fail_msg("Bad address %lx\n", addr); } static int validate_lower_address_hint(void) @@ -107,23 +100,29 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) char *hint; unsigned long i, lchunks, hchunks; + ksft_print_header(); + ksft_set_plan(1);
for (i = 0; i < NR_CHUNKS_LOW; i++) { ptr[i] = mmap(NULL, MAP_CHUNK_SIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0); if (ptr[i] == MAP_FAILED) { - if (validate_lower_address_hint()) - return 1; + if (validate_lower_address_hint()) { + ksft_test_result_skip("Memory constraint not fulfilled\n"); + ksft_finished(); + }
Hi,
When validate_lower_address_hint() returns 1, it implies that despite filling the lower
range, mmap succeeded. IMHO, ksft_exit_fail_msg() should be used instead, with a
more descriptive message indicating that the memory was unexpectedly allocated.
Can you fire up a patch for this? Otherwise I'll get back to it next week.
Regards
Dev
break; } - if (validate_addr(ptr[i], 0)) - return 1; + validate_addr(ptr[i], 0); } lchunks = i; hptr = (char **) calloc(NR_CHUNKS_HIGH, sizeof(char *)); - if (hptr == NULL) - return 1; + if (hptr == NULL) { + ksft_test_result_skip("Memory constraint not fulfilled\n"); + ksft_finished(); + } for (i = 0; i < NR_CHUNKS_HIGH; i++) { hint = hind_addr(); @@ -133,8 +132,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) if (hptr[i] == MAP_FAILED) break; - if (validate_addr(hptr[i], 1)) - return 1; + validate_addr(hptr[i], 1); } hchunks = i; @@ -145,5 +143,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) munmap(hptr[i], MAP_CHUNK_SIZE); free(hptr); - return 0;
+ ksft_test_result_pass("Test\n"); + ksft_finished(); }