Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] selftests/vm: Add protection_keys tests to run_vmtests
To:     Kalpana Shetty <kalpana.shetty@amd.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        shuah@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220617111019.476-1-kalpana.shetty@amd.com>
Cc:     Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <f73fd7c9-cb9c-1e89-4e22-e6931172eb91@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 17 Jun 2022 13:31:52 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20220617111019.476-1-kalpana.shetty@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 6/17/22 5:10 AM, Kalpana Shetty wrote:
> Adding "protected_keys" tests to "run_vmtests.sh" would help out to run all VM related tests
> from a single shell script.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kalpana Shetty <kalpana.shetty@amd.com>
> ---
> Changes in V3:
>   Shuah Khan's review comments incorporated, added protection_keys binary check.
> 
>   tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh | 11 +++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh
> index 41fce8bea929..b19c6b1b84c4 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh
> @@ -179,4 +179,15 @@ run_test ./ksm_tests -N -m 1
>   # KSM test with 2 NUMA nodes and merge_across_nodes = 0
>   run_test ./ksm_tests -N -m 0
>   
> +# protection_keys tests
> +if ./protection_keys_32 &> /dev/null
> +then
> +	run_test ./protection_keys_32
> +fi
> +
> +if ./protection_keys_64 &> /dev/null
> +then
> +	run_test ./protection_keys_64
> +fi
> +
>   exit $exitcode
> 

Why not use file test operators. -x works for this case.
There is no need to run attempt to run the test.

thanks,
-- Shuah