From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32B336127; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 05:00:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710392453; cv=none; b=G9oDa/OL4MglzLPC/AVZH+7S/+y1H3CgbfAdNnj3aqo8mJcOOyXNSOwOowlPZk3RqPoW19xpGWIzVyWWncKi4AHnp+saLF0XOxw9hrduDnOknyKogB7MarCYN7iOqXZc1uZOhr2dGe3U7iBUH67r0IDQ4cNKOYtwGSOkH4MXvl8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710392453; c=relaxed/simple; bh=y6QaxWFqGnE5GaMe6rGX0u/jHox4nnL4G0s/sorQqV8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=YMYbx9xq+UivdqNHUFLkUCgVT3cmczhneUeljO1DhPkcOaFlJlfoq5dmazH7eYIXEtaD1XgI/mz0/5RX8eufHcFPCpmHTYfkPHr/hlYBnM+DKiQSaltd5UPJc+hJRQa7vj9Pzq+uJELi4Um5tIb/do5Dl84w/8pzOUAJYhpEXv8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FE671007; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:01:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.162.40.27] (e116581.arm.com [10.162.40.27]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E78E03F73F; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:00:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <12b0aa90-3b4f-4fb0-b4df-c677f496cb09@arm.com> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:30:44 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/12] selftests/mm: virtual_address_range: conform to TAP format output Content-Language: en-US To: Muhammad Usama Anjum , Andrew Morton , Shuah Khan Cc: kernel@collabora.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Anshuman.Khandual@arm.com References: <20240202113119.2047740-1-usama.anjum@collabora.com> <20240202113119.2047740-13-usama.anjum@collabora.com> From: Dev Jain In-Reply-To: <20240202113119.2047740-13-usama.anjum@collabora.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 > --- > .../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 > #include > #include > +#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. 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(); > }