mbox series

[0/2] kselftest/arm64: Improvements to BTI tests on non-BTI systems

Message ID 20230110-arm64-bti-selftest-skip-v1-0-143ecdc84567@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series kselftest/arm64: Improvements to BTI tests on non-BTI systems | expand

Message

Mark Brown Jan. 10, 2023, 8:49 p.m. UTC
While looking at the BTI selftest results on a non-BTI system I noticed
that not only are we printing invalid test numbers in that case, we're
skipping running the tests entirely even though there's a well defined
ABI we could be verifying and the code already knows what the results
should be.

The first patch here is a fix to the reporting of test numbers when
skipping, the second one just removes the skipping entirely in favour of
a runtime check for what the result of a BTI binary should be.

To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>

---
Mark Brown (2):
      kselftest/arm64: Fix test numbering when skipping tests
      kselftest/arm64: Run BTI selftests on systems without BTI

 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/bti/test.c | 25 ++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: b7bfaa761d760e72a969d116517eaa12e404c262
change-id: 20230110-arm64-bti-selftest-skip-9fdf5e94fb62

Best regards,

Comments

Catalin Marinas Jan. 12, 2023, 5:48 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 20:49:58 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> While looking at the BTI selftest results on a non-BTI system I noticed
> that not only are we printing invalid test numbers in that case, we're
> skipping running the tests entirely even though there's a well defined
> ABI we could be verifying and the code already knows what the results
> should be.
> 
> The first patch here is a fix to the reporting of test numbers when
> skipping, the second one just removes the skipping entirely in favour of
> a runtime check for what the result of a BTI binary should be.
> 
> [...]

Applied to arm64 (for-next/kselftest), thanks!

[1/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix test numbering when skipping tests
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/30792e7c18b6
[2/2] kselftest/arm64: Run BTI selftests on systems without BTI
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/1c3b614548b5