| Message ID | 20231108094055.221234-1-pbonzini@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | selftests: kvm/s390x: use vm_create_barebones() | expand |
Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2023-11-08 10:40:55) > This function does the same but makes it clearer why one would use > the "____"-prefixed version of vm_create(). > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Thanks! Tested-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 04:40:55 -0500 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > This function does the same but makes it clearer why one would use > the "____"-prefixed version of vm_create(). > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c | 11 +++-------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c > index c8e0a6495a63..626a2b8a2037 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c > @@ -94,11 +94,6 @@ static void guest_dirty_test_data(void) > ); > } > > -static struct kvm_vm *create_vm(void) > -{ > - return ____vm_create(VM_MODE_DEFAULT); > -} > - > static void create_main_memslot(struct kvm_vm *vm) > { > int i; > @@ -157,7 +152,7 @@ static struct kvm_vm *create_vm_two_memslots(void) > { > struct kvm_vm *vm; > > - vm = create_vm(); > + vm = vm_create_barebones(); > > create_memslots(vm); > > @@ -276,7 +271,7 @@ static void assert_exit_was_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > static void test_migration_mode(void) > { > - struct kvm_vm *vm = create_vm(); > + struct kvm_vm *vm = vm_create_barebones(); > struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu; > u64 orig_psw; > int rc; > @@ -670,7 +665,7 @@ struct testdef { > */ > static int machine_has_cmma(void) > { > - struct kvm_vm *vm = create_vm(); > + struct kvm_vm *vm = vm_create_barebones(); > int r; > > r = !__kvm_has_device_attr(vm->fd, KVM_S390_VM_MEM_CTRL, KVM_S390_VM_MEM_ENABLE_CMMA);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c index c8e0a6495a63..626a2b8a2037 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c @@ -94,11 +94,6 @@ static void guest_dirty_test_data(void) ); } -static struct kvm_vm *create_vm(void) -{ - return ____vm_create(VM_MODE_DEFAULT); -} - static void create_main_memslot(struct kvm_vm *vm) { int i; @@ -157,7 +152,7 @@ static struct kvm_vm *create_vm_two_memslots(void) { struct kvm_vm *vm; - vm = create_vm(); + vm = vm_create_barebones(); create_memslots(vm); @@ -276,7 +271,7 @@ static void assert_exit_was_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) static void test_migration_mode(void) { - struct kvm_vm *vm = create_vm(); + struct kvm_vm *vm = vm_create_barebones(); struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu; u64 orig_psw; int rc; @@ -670,7 +665,7 @@ struct testdef { */ static int machine_has_cmma(void) { - struct kvm_vm *vm = create_vm(); + struct kvm_vm *vm = vm_create_barebones(); int r; r = !__kvm_has_device_attr(vm->fd, KVM_S390_VM_MEM_CTRL, KVM_S390_VM_MEM_ENABLE_CMMA);
This function does the same but makes it clearer why one would use the "____"-prefixed version of vm_create(). Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/cmma_test.c | 11 +++-------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)