From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dave.hansen at intel.com (Dave Hansen) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:06:44 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v12 06/22] selftests/vm: fix the wrong assert in pkey_disable_set() In-Reply-To: <1519264541-7621-7-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> References: <1519264541-7621-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> <1519264541-7621-7-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: On 02/21/2018 05:55 PM, Ram Pai wrote: > If the flag is 0, no bits will be set. Hence we cant expect > the resulting bitmap to have a higher value than what it > was earlier. > > cc: Dave Hansen > cc: Florian Weimer > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai > --- > tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > index 83216c5..0109388 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ void pkey_disable_set(int pkey, int flags) > dprintf1("%s(%d) pkey_reg: 0x%lx\n", > __func__, pkey, rdpkey_reg()); > if (flags) > - pkey_assert(rdpkey_reg() > orig_pkey_reg); > + pkey_assert(rdpkey_reg() >= orig_pkey_reg); > dprintf1("END<---%s(%d, 0x%x)\n", __func__, > pkey, flags); > } I'm not sure about this one. Did this cause a problem for you? Why would you call this and ask no bits to be set? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dave.hansen@intel.com (Dave Hansen) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:06:44 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v12 06/22] selftests/vm: fix the wrong assert in pkey_disable_set() In-Reply-To: <1519264541-7621-7-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> References: <1519264541-7621-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> <1519264541-7621-7-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <20180316220644.ce55ntOWOImKCEhLx6as-JTKWZva0RbEjwG3ogUeTWc@z> On 02/21/2018 05:55 PM, Ram Pai wrote: > If the flag is 0, no bits will be set. Hence we cant expect > the resulting bitmap to have a higher value than what it > was earlier. > > cc: Dave Hansen > cc: Florian Weimer > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai > --- > tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > index 83216c5..0109388 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c > @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ void pkey_disable_set(int pkey, int flags) > dprintf1("%s(%d) pkey_reg: 0x%lx\n", > __func__, pkey, rdpkey_reg()); > if (flags) > - pkey_assert(rdpkey_reg() > orig_pkey_reg); > + pkey_assert(rdpkey_reg() >= orig_pkey_reg); > dprintf1("END<---%s(%d, 0x%x)\n", __func__, > pkey, flags); > } I'm not sure about this one. Did this cause a problem for you? Why would you call this and ask no bits to be set? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html