On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 12:53:20 +0200
Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The sync_regs test currently does not have any output (unless one
> of the TEST_ASSERT statement fails), so it's hard to say for a user
> whether a certain new sub-test has been included in the binary or
> not. Let's make this a little bit more user-friendly and include
> some TAP output via the kselftests.h interface.
> To be able to distinguish the different sub-tests more easily, we
> also break up the huge main() function here in more fine grained
> parts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../selftests/kvm/s390x/sync_regs_test.c | 86 ++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/sync_regs_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/sync_regs_test.c
> index caf7b8859a94..d5ddcbb82d12 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/sync_regs_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/sync_regs_test.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> #include "test_util.h"
> #include "kvm_util.h"
> #include "diag318_test_handler.h"
> +#include "kselftest.h"
>
> #define VCPU_ID 5
>
> @@ -74,27 +75,9 @@ static void compare_sregs(struct kvm_sregs *left, struct kvm_sync_regs *right)
> #define TEST_SYNC_FIELDS (KVM_SYNC_GPRS|KVM_SYNC_ACRS|KVM_SYNC_CRS|KVM_SYNC_DIAG318)
> #define INVALID_SYNC_FIELD 0x80000000
>
> -int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> +void test_read_invalid(struct kvm_vm *vm, struct kvm_run *run)
> {
> - struct kvm_vm *vm;
> - struct kvm_run *run;
> - struct kvm_regs regs;
> - struct kvm_sregs sregs;
> - int rv, cap;
> -
> - /* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */
> - setbuf(stdout, NULL);
> -
> - cap = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_SYNC_REGS);
> - if (!cap) {
> - print_skip("CAP_SYNC_REGS not supported");
> - exit(KSFT_SKIP);
> - }
> -
> - /* Create VM */
> - vm = vm_create_default(VCPU_ID, 0, guest_code);
> -
> - run = vcpu_state(vm, VCPU_ID);
> + int rv;
>
> /* Request reading invalid register set from VCPU. */
> run->kvm_valid_regs = INVALID_SYNC_FIELD;
> @@ -110,6 +93,11 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> "Invalid kvm_valid_regs did not cause expected KVM_RUN error: %d\n",
> rv);
> vcpu_state(vm, VCPU_ID)->kvm_valid_regs = 0;
> +}
> +
> +void test_set_invalid(struct kvm_vm *vm, struct kvm_run *run)
> +{
> + int rv;
>
> /* Request setting invalid register set into VCPU. */
> run->kvm_dirty_regs = INVALID_SYNC_FIELD;
> @@ -125,6 +113,13 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> "Invalid kvm_dirty_regs did not cause expected KVM_RUN error: %d\n",
> rv);
> vcpu_state(vm, VCPU_ID)->kvm_dirty_regs = 0;
> +}
> +
> +void test_req_and_verify_all_valid_regs(struct kvm_vm *vm, struct kvm_run *run)
> +{
> + struct kvm_sregs sregs;
> + struct kvm_regs regs;
> + int rv;
>
> /* Request and verify all valid register sets. */
> run->kvm_valid_regs = TEST_SYNC_FIELDS;
> @@ -146,6 +141,13 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>
> vcpu_sregs_get(vm, VCPU_ID, &sregs);
> compare_sregs(&sregs, &run->s.regs);
> +}
> +
> +void test_set_and_verify_various_reg_values(struct kvm_vm *vm, struct kvm_run *run)
> +{
> + struct kvm_sregs sregs;
> + struct kvm_regs regs;
> + int rv;
>
> /* Set and verify various register values */
> run->s.regs.gprs[11] = 0xBAD1DEA;
> @@ -180,6 +182,11 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>
> vcpu_sregs_get(vm, VCPU_ID, &sregs);
> compare_sregs(&sregs, &run->s.regs);
> +}
> +
> +void test_clear_kvm_dirty_regs_bits(struct kvm_vm *vm, struct kvm_run *run)
> +{
> + int rv;
>
> /* Clear kvm_dirty_regs bits, verify new s.regs values are
> * overwritten with existing guest values.
> @@ -200,8 +207,45 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> TEST_ASSERT(run->s.regs.diag318 != 0x4B1D,
> "diag318 sync regs value incorrect 0x%llx.",
> run->s.regs.diag318);
> +}
> +
> +struct testdef {
> + const char *name;
> + void (*test)(struct kvm_vm *vm, struct kvm_run *run);
> +} testlist[] = {
> + { "read invalid", test_read_invalid },
> + { "set invalid", test_set_invalid },
> + { "request+verify all valid regs", test_req_and_verify_all_valid_regs },
> + { "set+verify various regs", test_set_and_verify_various_reg_values },
> + { "clear kvm_dirty_regs bits", test_clear_kvm_dirty_regs_bits },
> +};
> +
> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> +{
> + static struct kvm_run *run;
> + static struct kvm_vm *vm;
> + int idx;
> +
> + /* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */
> + setbuf(stdout, NULL);
> +
> + if (!kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_SYNC_REGS))
> + ksft_exit_skip("CAP_SYNC_REGS not supported");
I'm not an expert on the TAP format, but wouldn't it be more meaningful
to print the header first? (like you do in the previous patch)
> +
> + /* Create VM */
> + vm = vm_create_default(VCPU_ID, 0, guest_code);
> +
> + run = vcpu_state(vm, VCPU_ID);
> +
> + ksft_print_header();
> + ksft_set_plan(ARRAY_SIZE(testlist));
> +
> + for (idx = 0; idx < ARRAY_SIZE(testlist); idx++) {
> + testlist[idx].test(vm, run);
> + ksft_test_result_pass("%s\n", testlist[idx].name);
> + }
>
> kvm_vm_free(vm);
>
> - return 0;
> + ksft_finished();
> }
