From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB9F5C433EF for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2022 17:20:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1344219AbiFNRU3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2022 13:20:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41614 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1344158AbiFNRU1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2022 13:20:27 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-x229.google.com (mail-oi1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::229]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E2C72E0BF for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2022 10:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x229.google.com with SMTP id v143so12371398oie.13 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2022 10:20:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hg6Vqov4iXvBWaAWFrjzE3cJyqu2kSLgOmZIB62TeP4=; b=ZkUTOL7K1RF/aEE1Lfl/rHZMd5mzmuyLkpzUflHyzVmXEl0/ykuBz0T6xVQIEM/eVN s/D90OYveIE+nIbTNu4ml9ME5ulVcDOTtFLHdbYk6gxDJhzCQ86LnuIKbK3IMvRYtkht 733KAbrSO+4Eg6Xfa+qhVujYC0UKgFD0zMnGU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=hg6Vqov4iXvBWaAWFrjzE3cJyqu2kSLgOmZIB62TeP4=; b=Nw1zfik1p+c+PW3SmTMtT3zPzkPZYRz+cyaLlU6CG1FNsdRdL2f9oFAyiOqtW8ck6z EnCFtiNDjnQpp9uhEj1tBK77hWL95G0RC1vDN7SVr4Qznw43z7SaJa+5mRDdMXP6DNf6 A4DRnoKG8AmffOh8Xo5xtI2c9PTUHVSqu1PXBwVsVKrF9HO/sQzIrYwTD5cexDS3Ftew nbnsv4wJUQOQknHx0pEov9z4JJhl4WiK8BVQQne9R8zYDc5V2mgJjDKufmyBC+Bt4rW0 wyr2xgXvhlNI2CyBthI+P0iTx5pRToH7vZajMCP4ju41N2xSs/HGgipnvZhwdsGDodlu 41VA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5316ytabYi5PmptTvl7qhhCLRhMi/t12HD+W9XhY5HHumvkbl1cs s9OgHTG+p6iDMTirfoUdWVVHKg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz5iNx+05iYtyKjN+1yjrjUV9JdHERfov+sTvxBpWyYWz/4EqWVrZiwlG4doCoQdTxjdoKR8w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1512:b0:32e:f1bf:b8f8 with SMTP id u18-20020a056808151200b0032ef1bfb8f8mr2555983oiw.81.1655227224787; Tue, 14 Jun 2022 10:20:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.128] ([38.15.45.1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h4-20020a056870170400b000f5e33aaa66sm6074177oae.0.2022.06.14.10.20.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Jun 2022 10:20:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] selftests/vm: Add protection_keys tests to run_vmtests To: "Shetty, Kalpana" , akpm@linux-foundation.org, shuah@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan References: <20220610090704.296-1-kalpana.shetty@amd.com> <8e7fca3a-096c-7d6c-e43b-9292995ab970@linuxfoundation.org> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: <2f157493-02ed-4bc8-6624-b7d077c0d5af@linuxfoundation.org> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 11:20:23 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On 6/14/22 6:15 AM, Shetty, Kalpana wrote: > > On 6/14/2022 3:14 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 6/10/22 3:07 AM, Kalpana Shetty wrote: >>> Adding "protected_keys" tests to "run_vmtests.sh" would help out to run all VM related tests >>> from a single shell script. >>> >> >> Makes sense - can you explain why you can't just run >> protection_keys_32 without checks? > > Yes; we can run protection_keys_32 without check. > > >> Why are you checking for VADDR64? > > The check is added to ensure if the system is in 64-bit mode before executing 64-bit binary. > > Okay. protection_keys_32 will only be built on 32-bit system and. protection_keys_64 on 64-bit system. Won't it be better to check if binary exists and run either _32 or _64 instead of checking for VADDR64? thanks, -- Shuah