On 10/30/24 09:34, Mark Brown wrote:
We don't actually test SIGILL generation for CMPBR since the need to branch makes it a pain to generate and the SIGILL detection would be unreliable anyway. Since this should be very unusual we provide a stub function rather than supporting a missing function. The sigill functions aren't well sorted in the file so the ordering is a bit random.
This is talking about the one that isn't implemented. Can you add a sentence or two about the ones that this patch adds?
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> --- tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c | 273 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 271 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c index f2d6007a2b983eba77a880ec7e614396a6cb1377..beb380bc09b0d07269a85a60e5d2977367740473 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c @@ -46,6 +46,12 @@ static void atomics_sigill(void) asm volatile(".inst 0xb82003ff" : : : ); }+static void cmpbr_sigill(void)+{ + /* Not implemented, too complicated and unreliable anyway */ +} +
You anticpated "not used" messages looks like. I see that this gets called - thanks. Looks good to me. With the change to change log Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> thanks, -- Shuah
