Hi Pavel, On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 4:21 PM Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi! > > > From: Fuad Tabba <tabba@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > [ Upstream commit d8ac05ea13d789d5491a5920d70a05659015441d ] > > > > KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION ioctl can return any negative value on error, > > and not necessarily -1. Change the assertion to reflect that. > > > > Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@xxxxxxxxxx> > > This is userland code, right? > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c > > @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ int kvm_check_cap(long cap) > > exit(KSFT_SKIP); > > > > ret = ioctl(kvm_fd, KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION, cap); > > - TEST_ASSERT(ret != -1, "KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION IOCTL failed,\n" > > + TEST_ASSERT(ret >= 0, "KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION IOCTL failed,\n" > > " rc: %i errno: %i", ret, errno); There's at least one case that I am aware of that potentially would return a value other than -1 on error, which is a check for KVM_CAP_MSI_DEVID (-EINVAL, -22): https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c#L229 Also, considering that this is test code, it might be good to have the check be as strict as possible. Cheers, /fuad > And syscalls return -1 on error in userland, not anything else. So > this should not be needed. > > Best regards, > Pavel > -- > DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk > HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
