On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 4:18 PM Andrew Jones <ajones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 09:42:58PM +0800, Haibo Xu wrote: > > Only do the get/set tests on present and blessed registers > > since we don't know the capabilities of any new ones. > > > > Suggested-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Haibo Xu <haibo1.xu@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c | 29 ++++++++++++++-------- > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c > > index c61090806007..74fb6f6fdd09 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/get-reg-list.c > > @@ -49,6 +49,10 @@ extern int vcpu_configs_n; > > for_each_reg_filtered(i) \ > > if (!find_reg(blessed_reg, blessed_n, reg_list->reg[i])) > > > > +#define for_each_present_blessed_reg(i) \ > > + for ((i) = 0; (i) < blessed_n; ++(i)) \ > > + if (find_reg(reg_list->reg, reg_list->n, blessed_reg[i])) > > I just realized this is backwards. We need 'i' to index reg_list->reg in > the body of the loop. That means we need to write this as > > #define for_each_present_blessed_reg(i) \ > for_each_reg(i) \ > if (find_reg(blessed_reg, blessed_n, reg_list->reg[i])) > > (Which, in hindsight, makes sense since we're replacing a for_each_reg() > loop.) > Sure, I will update it in v6. Thanks! > Thanks, > drew
