[PATCH v2 9/9] kselftest/arm64: Add 2024 dpISA extensions to hwcap test

[Shuah Khan]

On 10/30/24 09:34, Mark Brown wrote:
> We don't actually test SIGILL generation for CMPBR since the need to
> branch makes it a pain to generate and the SIGILL detection would be
> unreliable anyway. Since this should be very unusual we provide a stub
> function rather than supporting a missing function.
> 
> The sigill functions aren't well sorted in the file so the ordering is a
> bit random.
This is talking about the one that isn't implemented. Can you add
a sentence or two about the ones that this patch adds?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c | 273 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 271 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c
> index f2d6007a2b983eba77a880ec7e614396a6cb1377..beb380bc09b0d07269a85a60e5d2977367740473 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,12 @@ static void atomics_sigill(void)
>   	asm volatile(".inst 0xb82003ff" : : : );
>   }
>   
> +static void cmpbr_sigill(void)
> +{
> +	/* Not implemented, too complicated and unreliable anyway */
> +}
> +

You anticpated "not used" messages looks like. I see that
this gets called - thanks.

Looks good to me. With the change to change log

Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan at linuxfoundation.org>

thanks,
-- Shuah