On 7/10/24 4:31 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 02, 2024 at 06:24:59PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> Conform the layout, informational and status messages to TAP. No
>> functional change is intended other than the layout of output messages.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c | 10 ++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c
>> index 955f87c1170d7..8ae26e496c89c 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c
>> @@ -17,19 +17,21 @@ int main(void)
>> static int tbi_enabled = 0;
>> unsigned long tag = 0;
>> struct utsname *ptr;
>> - int err;
>> +
>> + ksft_print_header();
>> + ksft_set_plan(1);
>>
>> if (prctl(PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL, PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE, 0, 0, 0) == 0)
>> tbi_enabled = 1;
>> ptr = (struct utsname *)malloc(sizeof(*ptr));
>> if (!ptr)
>> - ksft_exit_fail_msg("Failed to allocate utsname buffer\n");
>> + ksft_exit_fail_perror("Failed to allocate utsname buffer");
>>
>> if (tbi_enabled)
>> tag = 0x42;
>> ptr = (struct utsname *)SET_TAG(ptr, tag);
>> - err = uname(ptr);
>> + ksft_test_result(!uname(ptr), "Syscall successful with tagged address\n");
>> free(ptr);
>>
>> - return err;
>> + ksft_finished();
>> }
>
> Sorry, these patches slipped through the cracks. We seem to be pretty
> inconsistent with using ksft_exit_fail_perror() and ksft_finished(). Is
> there some plan to update the rest or is it only this location that you
> came across?
Ideally we would want that all the test are updated to output better logs
than what they have currently. We may update some more tests. This is
something we want the maintainers to get aware of that kselftest.h wrapper
provide helper function to better write the tests and then all contributors
start using it in new tests and older tests may also get updated in the
process.
>
> Adding Mark Brown as well to this thread, he's been contributing quite a
> lot recently to the arm64 kselftests.
>
--
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum
