From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E22D028686; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 15:32:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790609549; cv=none; b=eQQEi+eM3G75v7R67jBQvimciCs1qGGF1vnNZuYhdpTD2354MdQMjA2e8k1RpQYOQl3WGN99j50l+r9yvHmKgOeNxvHv/9ya6IzGOSaBeQr9fCrDp2lEMLJf8RFZ4fvM8QZW9Z9XddUu+oU4QLqvN7mv5Z/WJK4rsru6SA97uIU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790609549; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nMN/ZfJZ5/x4lLlM6Mzl72k/Q/UmYS7ja+KXiOahhrI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jPsS64gHMWnXrGJomddSWtrhBp0olRp2A1JxyJ9DLGrbHyQLhqhYeJtwbyjBrJLz+N3Rk6igCYCRrDWVsSwrtS2f55mfwrYDEXZmOIApsTQa4I0HjJHvgNtElmmVOxOf4rp+IOqd2fz/fXGUv+465UIVcllLtpdm4hkzjEcYW4U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=fs3Ja8i4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="fs3Ja8i4" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DD021F000FF; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 15:32:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790609547; bh=llUYIUStfKzWGEiUSq/kXf7+E7RUJ4s4Q/3ArTaa+qQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=fs3Ja8i4qjApR6LthEA15//qePnT7LSflp7EONKutl5hrr9xCeZ8nsvtDgcdUlQYd 2OAqBnjB24xD37WhSPvFTEpmcuFv47XN3UK1uqxvGwEHhFBpia9a5/vEjBJQvLMrDi MpIIDwY3XxdIOp3KU6m75l2KurbE+OqRO26B/cFd2Q10kPRvPAwie0AFQlTbSerfQt KDao/gDp7DUADjZ/d2aCwh9D2+FtJTym2pXP3EoPVqh/YOFNt71HplBziQqjN6ex21 0qtsbvj8eW/mAJlcC1X9qppGIMhmWkaxXVxjt+w/+VHQIsHKKQw1XsW6e+bKJXbblH 4dOjXJr9QdMwg== Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 16:32:21 +0100 From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" To: Mark Brown Cc: Marc Zyngier , Joey Gouly , Suzuki K Poulose , Paolo Bonzini , Shuah Khan , Oliver Upton , Ben Horgan , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] KVM: selftests: arm64: Report register reset tests individually Message-ID: References: <20260901-kvm-arm64-set-id-regs-aarch64-v7-0-7b065b0bda9a@kernel.org> <20260901-kvm-arm64-set-id-regs-aarch64-v7-2-7b065b0bda9a@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260901-kvm-arm64-set-id-regs-aarch64-v7-2-7b065b0bda9a@kernel.org> On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 07:50:02PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > set_id_regs tests that registers have their values preserved over reset. > Currently it reports all registers in a single test with an instantly fatal > assert which isn't great for diagnostics, it's hard to tell which register > failed or if it's just one register. Change this to report each register as > a separate test so that it's clear from the program output which registers > have problems. Sounds reasonable. > > Reviewed-by: Ben Horgan > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown All LGTM so: Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) > --- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c | 19 +++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c > index db6414a93ad3..3aa8886e8b70 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c > @@ -819,13 +819,21 @@ static void test_vcpu_non_ftr_id_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > static void test_assert_id_reg_unchanged(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 encoding) > { > size_t idx = encoding_to_range_idx(encoding); > - u64 observed; > + u64 observed, expected; > + bool pass; > > observed = vcpu_get_reg(vcpu, KVM_ARM64_SYS_REG(encoding)); > - TEST_ASSERT_EQ(reset_mutable_bits(encoding, test_reg_vals[idx]), > - reset_mutable_bits(encoding, observed)); > + observed = reset_mutable_bits(encoding, observed); > + expected = reset_mutable_bits(encoding, test_reg_vals[idx]); > + pass = expected == observed; > + if (!pass) > + ksft_print_msg("%lx != %lx\n", expected, observed); > + ksft_test_result(pass, "%s unchanged by reset\n", > + get_reg_name(encoding)); Ah yeah -> individual tests. > } > > +#define ID_REG_RESET_UNCHANGED_TEST (ARRAY_SIZE(test_regs) + NUM_EXTRA_REGS) Yeah can see from original test_reset_preserves_id_regs() that this is correct. > + > static void test_reset_preserves_id_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > /* > @@ -843,8 +851,6 @@ static void test_reset_preserves_id_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > test_assert_id_reg_unchanged(vcpu, SYS_MIDR_EL1); > test_assert_id_reg_unchanged(vcpu, SYS_REVIDR_EL1); > test_assert_id_reg_unchanged(vcpu, SYS_AIDR_EL1); > - > - ksft_test_result_pass("%s\n", __func__); > } > > int main(void) > @@ -872,7 +878,8 @@ int main(void) > > ksft_print_header(); > > - test_cnt = 3 + MPAM_IDREG_TEST + MTE_IDREG_TEST + GUEST_READ_TEST; > + test_cnt = 2 + MPAM_IDREG_TEST + MTE_IDREG_TEST + GUEST_READ_TEST + > + ID_REG_RESET_UNCHANGED_TEST; > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_regs); i++) > for (j = 0; test_regs[i].ftr_bits[j].type != FTR_END; j++) > test_cnt++; > > -- > 2.47.3 > > -- Cheers, Lorenzo