public inbox for live-patching@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
To: Marcos Paulo de Souza <mpdesouza@suse.com>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
	Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] selftests: livepatch: test-syscall: Check for ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 16:12:38 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <abhjYtyveer4niGM@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260313-lp-tests-old-fixes-v1-1-71ac6dfb3253@suse.com>

On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 05:58:32PM -0300, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> Instead of checking if the architecture running the test was powerpc,
> check if CONF_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER is defined or not.
> 
> No functional changes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <mpdesouza@suse.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_syscall.c | 7 +++----
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_syscall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_syscall.c
> index dd802783ea849..c01a586866304 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_syscall.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test_modules/test_klp_syscall.c
> @@ -12,15 +12,14 @@
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>  #include <linux/livepatch.h>
>  
> -#if defined(__x86_64__)
> +#if !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER)
> +#define FN_PREFIX
> +#elif defined(__x86_64__)
>  #define FN_PREFIX __x64_
>  #elif defined(__s390x__)
>  #define FN_PREFIX __s390x_
>  #elif defined(__aarch64__)
>  #define FN_PREFIX __arm64_
> -#else
> -/* powerpc does not select ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER */
> -#define FN_PREFIX

The patch does maintain the previous behavior, but I'm wondering if the
original assertion about ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER on Power was correct:

  $ grep ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER arch/powerpc/Kconfig
          select ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER         if !SPU_BASE && !COMPAT
          depends on PPC64 && ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER

Perhaps I just forgot what that additional piece of information that
explains the comment (highly probable these days), and if so, might be
nice to add to this commit since I don't see it in 6a71770442b5
("selftests: livepatch: Test livepatching a heavily called syscall").

Thanks,
--
Joe


  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-16 20:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-13 20:58 [PATCH 0/8] kselftests: livepatch: Adapt tests to be executed on 4.12 kernels Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 1/8] selftests: livepatch: test-syscall: Check for ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-16 20:12   ` Joe Lawrence [this message]
2026-03-19 12:54     ` Miroslav Benes
2026-03-19 14:11       ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-20 10:45         ` Miroslav Benes
2026-03-27 13:24           ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-27 13:16     ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 2/8] selftests: livepatch: test-kprobe: Replace true/false mod param by 1/0 Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-19 13:03   ` Miroslav Benes
2026-03-19 14:16     ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-20 11:18       ` Miroslav Benes
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 3/8] selftests: livepatch: test-kprobe: Check if kprobes can work with livepatches Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-16 20:38   ` Joe Lawrence
2026-03-19 14:35     ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-20 11:33       ` Petr Mladek
2026-03-27 13:43         ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 4/8] selftests: livepatch: functions: Introduce check_sysfs_exists Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-16 20:47   ` Joe Lawrence
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 5/8] selftests: livepatch: sysfs: Split tests of replace attribute Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-20 13:03   ` Miroslav Benes
2026-03-20 13:12   ` Petr Mladek
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 6/8] selftests: livepatch: sysfs: Split tests of stack_order attribute Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 7/8] selftests: livepatch: sysfs: Split tests of patched attribute Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-13 20:58 ` [PATCH 8/8] selftests: livepatch: functions.sh: Extend check for taint flag kernel message Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-20 13:04   ` Miroslav Benes
2026-03-20 13:26   ` Petr Mladek
2026-03-20 13:41     ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2026-03-20 13:31 ` [PATCH 0/8] kselftests: livepatch: Adapt tests to be executed on 4.12 kernels Petr Mladek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=abhjYtyveer4niGM@redhat.com \
    --to=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
    --cc=jikos@kernel.org \
    --cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
    --cc=mpdesouza@suse.com \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox