From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99AF536A352; Fri, 16 Oct 2026 15:36:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792164973; cv=none; b=JnJyf+CiDR9cua0XFm+x8bghR0RCq65ldNdyKJJJOe55H6zBrdr31ft6vs8LVV4pTpU535XT4g2wyVmR8ovA5JkWc0pwRWB5g9f161qyoIgSoeRhyG9cgKO1CxxJLT5ksIz3/rKkxH2fpGlCLUCY3E7U1IEjn0/b5APi9qNyrFA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792164973; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xOjat9Vi4PtYQbqy1AbKVZKYAZ1zqEoi+h2S0JYOTj0=; h=Message-ID:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date; b=oqORQjFwjjJSNURlWqlNIHIKT3RNycsfEgY2/iq23L3nOrU9qtTAxxP+bTfYomy/H+2D48+wqIEK3sKpW0Uf5vwfpIeoGJtb6S+YlOukU2RXsXrYFrRmW9ClH9oDIgNMnKiQELT3HTzeSSyD5IdpsS4ta4a6kjbTthMktQpgFNI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=kWj8+IFU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="kWj8+IFU" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E8C441F000C4; Fri, 16 Oct 2026 15:36:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792164972; bh=mEei+TK3DrwBKD32VXKwO/G8X0N42GnJzGwgLfMGo1Q=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=kWj8+IFUvqP8lyDXBxxSxlCebVqpj6tqWIZeCaZUqvtPvLI1bhMM5dAzYMDAr2LiB oGh3gAKEY0YIXtQfhYsJnJBg4MODL9SaPnzoHQvmCnhfMkjOA2Uci8F3h6pRylhawx PE2ObeI3i6m+dEUPo8lCWr20e7C9v5axVB2jyFGNKGK1u85L1YMER3rl0vAEzJGESz fbKRgngIrU783qeSeTfTAjj89KNCO+fc6QbQkClZ8J1DEQ/JJ2hfVJnbNWW01wiz5Q I5wYDIrZvKZVgRCdQzjh2oBnsaVRhTPZjDf+G5fjrQSpO0f16M2Zba7k/6WPnKXe+N Ff2JqWnsPJwnQ== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: Reject GICv3 ITS with a GICv5 VGIC Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Sascha Bischoff" , kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: "Oliver Upton" , "Marc Zyngier" In-Reply-To: <20261016152225.898761-3-sascha.bischoff@arm.com> References: <20261016152225.898761-1-sascha.bischoff@arm.com> <20261016152225.898761-3-sascha.bischoff@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 15:36:11 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] selftests: vgic_v5.c uses ad hoc skip messages and direct exit()= instead of TAP -- commit 1b97dfda1bac7a30c8395c0645ac8efb945b4639 Author: Sascha Bischoff KVM: selftests: Reject GICv3 ITS with a GICv5 VGIC Check that a GICv3 ITS and a GICv5 VGIC cannot be paired, regardless of which device is created first. Skip the check when the host does not expose a GICv3 ITS. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/vgic_v5.c b/tools/testing/= selftests/kvm/arm64/vgic_v5.c > index d5df742b23001..5bf7d99d29147 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/vgic_v5.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/vgic_v5.c [ ... ] > @@ -2003,8 +2003,40 @@ int test_kvm_device(u32 gic_dev_type) > return 0; > } > =20 > +static void test_vgic_v3_its_with_vgic_v5(void) > +{ > + struct kvm_vm *vm =3D vm_create_barebones(); > + int gic_fd, its_fd, ret; > + > + if (__kvm_test_create_device(vm, KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_VGIC_ITS)) { > + pr_info("No GICv3 ITS support; skipping mixed-model test.\n"); > + kvm_vm_free(vm); > + return; > + } [Severity: Medium] When running test_vgic_v3_its_with_vgic_v5() on a host without GICv3 ITS support, this prints an unstructured skip message and returns directly. Could this be converted to use a TAP reporting macro like ksft_test_result_skip() instead of an ad-hoc pr_info() and return? Additionally, running the test suite on a host without GICv5 support calls exit(KSFT_SKIP) directly in main() instead of using ksft_exit_skip(). Are there plans to update the main() exit path as well? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261016152225.8987= 61-1-sascha.bischoff@arm.com?part=3D2