From 2f248e0f8a6aa7199f435d77d94b53cf647e7d7b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andrew Jones Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 15:15:24 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] RISC-V: selftests: Convert hwprobe test to kselftest API Returning (exiting with) negative exit codes isn't user friendly, because the user must output the exit code with the shell, convert it from its unsigned 8-bit value back to the negative value, and then look up where that comes from in the code (which may be multiple places). Use the kselftests TAP interface, instead. Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230918131518.56803-13-ajones@ventanamicro.com Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt --- .../testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/hwprobe.c | 54 +++++++------------ 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/hwprobe.c b/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/hwprobe.c index 09f290a67420..4f15f1f3b4c3 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/hwprobe.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/hwprobe.c @@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ #include #include +#include "../../kselftest.h" + /* * Rather than relying on having a new enough libc to define this, just do it * ourselves. This way we don't need to be coupled to a new-enough libc to @@ -16,6 +18,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) unsigned long cpus; long out; + ksft_print_header(); + ksft_set_plan(5); + /* Fake the CPU_SET ops. */ cpus = -1; @@ -25,13 +30,16 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) */ for (long i = 0; i < 8; i++) pairs[i].key = i; + out = riscv_hwprobe(pairs, 8, 1, &cpus, 0); if (out != 0) - return -1; + ksft_exit_fail_msg("hwprobe() failed with %ld\n", out); + for (long i = 0; i < 4; ++i) { /* Fail if the kernel claims not to recognize a base key. */ if ((i < 4) && (pairs[i].key != i)) - return -2; + ksft_exit_fail_msg("Failed to recognize base key: key != i, " + "key=%ld, i=%ld\n", pairs[i].key, i); if (pairs[i].key != RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_BASE_BEHAVIOR) continue; @@ -39,52 +47,30 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) if (pairs[i].value & RISCV_HWPROBE_BASE_BEHAVIOR_IMA) continue; - return -3; + ksft_exit_fail_msg("Unexpected pair: (%ld, %ld)\n", pairs[i].key, pairs[i].value); } - /* - * This should also work with a NULL CPU set, but should not work - * with an improperly supplied CPU set. - */ out = riscv_hwprobe(pairs, 8, 0, 0, 0); - if (out != 0) - return -4; + ksft_test_result(out == 0, "NULL CPU set\n"); out = riscv_hwprobe(pairs, 8, 0, &cpus, 0); - if (out == 0) - return -5; + ksft_test_result(out != 0, "Bad CPU set\n"); out = riscv_hwprobe(pairs, 8, 1, 0, 0); - if (out == 0) - return -6; + ksft_test_result(out != 0, "NULL CPU set with non-zero count\n"); - /* - * Check that keys work by providing one that we know exists, and - * checking to make sure the resultig pair is what we asked for. - */ pairs[0].key = RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_BASE_BEHAVIOR; out = riscv_hwprobe(pairs, 1, 1, &cpus, 0); - if (out != 0) - return -7; - if (pairs[0].key != RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_BASE_BEHAVIOR) - return -8; + ksft_test_result(out == 0 && pairs[0].key == RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_BASE_BEHAVIOR, + "Existing key is maintained\n"); - /* - * Check that an unknown key gets overwritten with -1, - * but doesn't block elements after it. - */ pairs[0].key = 0x5555; pairs[1].key = 1; pairs[1].value = 0xAAAA; out = riscv_hwprobe(pairs, 2, 0, 0, 0); - if (out != 0) - return -9; - - if (pairs[0].key != -1) - return -10; - - if ((pairs[1].key != 1) || (pairs[1].value == 0xAAAA)) - return -11; + ksft_test_result(out == 0 && pairs[0].key == -1 && + pairs[1].key == 1 && pairs[1].value != 0xAAAA, + "Unknown key overwritten with -1 and doesn't block other elements\n"); - return 0; + ksft_finished(); } -- 2.25.1