Kind reminder.
This two patch series is removing a script which was marking test pass/fail
by adding pass/fail logic inside the test itself.
On 7/1/24 1:40 PM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> Soft reminder
>
> On 6/2/24 6:24 PM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> Conform the layout, informational and status messages to TAP. No
>> functional change is intended other than the layout of output messages.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.an...@collabora.com>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c | 10 ++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c
>> b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c
>> index 955f87c1170d7..8ae26e496c89c 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags/tags_test.c
>> @@ -17,19 +17,21 @@ int main(void)
>> static int tbi_enabled = 0;
>> unsigned long tag = 0;
>> struct utsname *ptr;
>> - int err;
>> +
>> + ksft_print_header();
>> + ksft_set_plan(1);
>>
>> if (prctl(PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL, PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE, 0, 0, 0) == 0)
>> tbi_enabled = 1;
>> ptr = (struct utsname *)malloc(sizeof(*ptr));
>> if (!ptr)
>> - ksft_exit_fail_msg("Failed to allocate utsname buffer\n");
>> + ksft_exit_fail_perror("Failed to allocate utsname buffer");
>>
>> if (tbi_enabled)
>> tag = 0x42;
>> ptr = (struct utsname *)SET_TAG(ptr, tag);
>> - err = uname(ptr);
>> + ksft_test_result(!uname(ptr), "Syscall successful with tagged
>> address\n");
>> free(ptr);
>>
>> - return err;
>> + ksft_finished();
>> }
>
--
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum
