From e42391150eabcfb2cc42f58c8b0394ebc3039c34 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:19:24 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] selftests: arm64: Fix and enable test for setting current VL
in vec-syscfg
We had some test code for verifying that we can write the current VL via
the prctl() interface but the condition for the test was inverted which
wasn't noticed as it was never actually hooked up to the array of tests
we execute. Fix this.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210929151925.9601-4-broonie@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c | 10 ++++------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c
index d48d3ee1bc36e..9d6ac843e6517 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c
@@ -329,12 +329,9 @@ static void prctl_set_same(struct vec_data *data)
return;
}
- if (cur_vl != data->rdvl())
- ksft_test_result_pass("%s current VL is %d\n",
- data->name, ret);
- else
- ksft_test_result_fail("%s prctl() VL %d but RDVL is %d\n",
- data->name, ret, data->rdvl());
+ ksft_test_result(cur_vl == data->rdvl(),
+ "%s set VL %d and have VL %d\n",
+ data->name, cur_vl, data->rdvl());
}
/* Can we set a new VL for this process? */
@@ -555,6 +552,7 @@ static const test_type tests[] = {
proc_write_max,
prctl_get,
+ prctl_set_same,
prctl_set,
prctl_set_no_child,
prctl_set_for_child,
--
2.30.2