Re: [PATCH] KVM: selftests: delete some dead code

Andrew Jones
2020-06-05T11:53:31Z

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:16:59PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 05/06/20 13:00, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > The "uffd_delay" variable is unsigned so it's always going to be >= 0.
> >
> > Fixes: 0119cb365c93 ("KVM: selftests: Add configurable demand paging delay")
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c | 2 --
> > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c
> > index 360cd3ea4cd67..4eb79621434e6 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c
> > @@ -615,8 +615,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> > break;
> > case 'd':
> > uffd_delay = strtoul(optarg, NULL, 0);
> > - TEST_ASSERT(uffd_delay >= 0,
> > - "A negative UFFD delay is not supported.");
> > break;
> > case 'b':
> > vcpu_memory_bytes = parse_size(optarg);
> >
>
> The bug is that strtoul is "impossible" to use correctly. The right fix
> would be to have a replacement for strtoul.

The test needs an upper limit. It obviously doesn't make sense to ever
want a ULONG_MAX usec delay. What's the maximum number of usecs we should
allow?

Thanks,
drew