Re: [PATCH v9 5/5] xen/riscv: test basic handling stuff

[Oleksii <oleksii.kurochko@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2024-07-10 at 12:07 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 10.07.2024 12:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 02.07.2024 13:23, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kurochko@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Acked-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  xen/arch/riscv/setup.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/xen/arch/riscv/setup.c b/xen/arch/riscv/setup.c
> > > index a6a29a1508..4f06203b46 100644
> > > --- a/xen/arch/riscv/setup.c
> > > +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/setup.c
> > > @@ -19,6 +19,20 @@ void arch_get_xen_caps(xen_capabilities_info_t
> > > *info)
> > >  unsigned char __initdata cpu0_boot_stack[STACK_SIZE]
> > >      __aligned(STACK_SIZE);
> > >  
> > > +static void test_run_in_exception(const struct cpu_user_regs
> > > *regs)
> > > +{
> > > +    printk("If you see this message, ");
> > > +    printk("run_in_exception_handler is most likely working\n");
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void test_macros_from_bug_h(void)
> > > +{
> > > +    run_in_exception_handler(test_run_in_exception);
> > > +    WARN();
> > > +    printk("If you see this message, ");
> > > +    printk("WARN is most likely working\n");
> > > +}
> > 
> > While for the moment this may be okay, in the longer run WARN()
> > will cause
> > quite a bit of output that you don't want on every boot. The
> > further plans
> > here will want mentioning in the description.
> > 
> > Additionally as part of re-basing I think you would have wanted to
> > put this
> > under the (relatively new) SELF_TESTS Kconfig control.
I will consider SELF_TESTS Kconfig, there is not a lot of sense to
print that every boot.

> 
> Oh, and: Is it possible there's a word ("exception"?) missing from
> the title?
Yes, I missed that. I will update the title to: " test basic exception
handling stuff ". Thanks.

~ Oleksii