Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 1/6] s390x: uv-guest: Add invalid share location test

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 19/04/2021 13.45, Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 4/19/21 1:24 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 16/03/2021 10.16, Janosch Frank wrote:
>>> Let's also test sharing unavailable memory.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>    s390x/uv-guest.c | 5 +++++
>>>    1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/s390x/uv-guest.c b/s390x/uv-guest.c
>>> index 99544442..a13669ab 100644
>>> --- a/s390x/uv-guest.c
>>> +++ b/s390x/uv-guest.c
>>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>>>    #include <asm/interrupt.h>
>>>    #include <asm/facility.h>
>>>    #include <asm/uv.h>
>>> +#include <sclp.h>
>>>    
>>>    static unsigned long page;
>>>    
>>> @@ -99,6 +100,10 @@ static void test_sharing(void)
>>>    	uvcb.header.len = sizeof(uvcb);
>>>    	cc = uv_call(0, (u64)&uvcb);
>>>    	report(cc == 0 && uvcb.header.rc == UVC_RC_EXECUTED, "share");
>>> +	uvcb.paddr = get_ram_size() + PAGE_SIZE;
>>> +	cc = uv_call(0, (u64)&uvcb);
>>> +	report(cc == 1 && uvcb.header.rc == 0x101, "invalid memory");
>>
>> Would it make sense to add a #define for 0x101 ?
>>
> 
> The RCs change meaning with each UV call so we can only re-use a small
> number of constants which wouldn't gain us a lot.

Ok, fair point. A define just for one spot does not make too much sense, indeed.

  Thomas