From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Received: from e23smtp08.au.ibm.com (e23smtp08.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.141])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99A671A2A85
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 20:26:46 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: from /spool/local
 by e23smtp08.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only!
 Violators will be prosecuted
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org> from <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>;
 Fri, 20 Mar 2015 19:26:45 +1000
Received: from d23relay06.au.ibm.com (d23relay06.au.ibm.com [9.185.63.219])
 by d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E742BB0040
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 20:26:40 +1100 (EST)
Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (d23av01.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.96])
 by d23relay06.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id
 t2K9QWpb36241576
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 20:26:40 +1100
Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by d23av01.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id
 t2K9Q6Sj021528
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 20:26:07 +1100
Message-ID: <550BE795.4070200@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:55:41 +0530
From: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sam Bobroff <sam.bobroff@au1.ibm.com>, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
 benh@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] selftests/powerpc: Add transactional syscall test
References: <cover.1426740212.git.sam.bobroff@au1.ibm.com>
 <b4a4ea23b20098512cf350b97ce98e0d1ea58531.1426740212.git.sam.bobroff@au1.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <b4a4ea23b20098512cf350b97ce98e0d1ea58531.1426740212.git.sam.bobroff@au1.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: mikey@neuling.org, azanella@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
 linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, matt@ozlabs.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On 03/19/2015 10:13 AM, Sam Bobroff wrote:
> Check that a syscall made during an active transaction will fail with
> the correct failure code and that one made during a suspended
> transaction will succeed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sam Bobroff <sam.bobroff@au1.ibm.com>

The test works.

> +
> +int tm_syscall(void)
> +{
> +	SKIP_IF(!((long)get_auxv_entry(AT_HWCAP2) & PPC_FEATURE2_HTM));
> +	setbuf(stdout, 0);
> +	FAIL_IF(!t_active_getppid_test());
> +	printf("%d active transactions correctly aborted.\n", TM_TEST_RUNS);
> +	FAIL_IF(!t_suspended_getppid_test());
> +	printf("%d suspended transactions succeeded.\n", TM_TEST_RUNS);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int main(void)
> +{
> +	return test_harness(tm_syscall, "tm_syscall");
> +}
> +

There is an extra blank line at the end of this file. Interchanging return
codes of 0 and 1 for various functions make it very confusing along with
negative FAIL_IF checks in the primary test function. Control flow structures
like these can use some in-code documentation for readability.

+	for (i = 0; i < TM_RETRIES; i++) {
+		if (__builtin_tbegin(0)) {
+			getppid();
+			__builtin_tend(0);
+			return 1;
+		}
+		if (t_failure_persistent())
+			return 0;

or

+		if (__builtin_tbegin(0)) {
+			__builtin_tsuspend();
+			getppid();
+			__builtin_tresume();
+			__builtin_tend(0);
+			return 1;
+		}
+		if (t_failure_persistent())
+			return 0;