expected_pkey_fault() is comparing the contents of pkey register with 0. This may not be true all the time. There could be bits set by default by the architecture which can never be changed. Hence compare the value against shadow pkey register, which is supposed to track the bits accurately all throughout cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@xxxxxxxxxx> --- tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c index 254b66d..6054093 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c @@ -926,10 +926,10 @@ void expected_pkey_fault(int pkey) pkey_assert(last_pkey_faults + 1 == pkey_faults); pkey_assert(last_si_pkey == pkey); /* - * The signal handler shold have cleared out PKEY register to let the + * The signal handler shold have cleared out pkey-register to let the * test program continue. We now have to restore it. */ - if (__rdpkey_reg() != 0) + if (__rdpkey_reg() != shadow_pkey_reg) pkey_assert(0); __wrpkey_reg(shadow_pkey_reg); -- 1.7.1 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
