On 14/04/2022 14.48, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
On 4/14/22 12:53, Thomas Huth wrote:
The memop test currently does not have any output (unless one of the TEST_ASSERT statement fails), so it's hard to say for a user whether a certain new sub-test has been included in the binary or not. Let's make this a little bit more user-friendly and include some TAP output via the kselftests.h interface.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth thuth@redhat.com
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c index b04c2c1b3c30..a2783d9afcac 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include "test_util.h" #include "kvm_util.h" +#include "kselftest.h" enum mop_target { LOGICAL, @@ -648,33 +649,88 @@ static void test_errors(void) kvm_vm_free(t.kvm_vm); } +struct testdef {
- const char *name;
- void (*test)(void);
- bool needs_extension;
Please make this numeric. You could also rename it to required_extension or similar.
[...]
- for (idx = 0; idx < ARRAY_SIZE(testlist); idx++) {
if (!testlist[idx].needs_extension || extension_cap) {Then check here that extension_cap >= the required extension. This way the test can easily be adapted in case of future extensions.
Not sure whether a ">=" will really be safe, since a future extension does not necessarily assert that previous extensions are available at the same time.
But I can still turn the bool into a numeric to make it a little bit more flexible for future use.
Thomas