On 20.12.2023 10:25, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:12:15AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 20.12.2023 10:08, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 08:31:29PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>> On 15/12/2023 11:18 am, Roger Pau Monne wrote: >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/test.h >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ >>>>> +#ifndef _ASM_X86_TEST_H_ >>>>> +#define _ASM_X86_TEST_H_ >>>>> + >>>>> +#include <xen/types.h> >>>>> + >>>>> +int test_smoc(uint32_t selection, uint32_t *results); >>>>> + >>>>> +static inline void execute_selftests(void) >>>> >>>> IMO run_selftests() would be better, but this is already not all of our >>>> selftests, and this particular function really doesn't warrant being >>>> static inline. >>>> >>>> But I'm also not sure what this is liable to contain other than >>>> test_smoc() so I'm not sure why we want it. >>> >>> This was requested by Jan, he was concerned that more of such tests >>> would appear. It's new in v4 IIRC. >> >> If the two of you want it without such a wrapper, so be it. I will admit >> I was a little puzzled to find it implemented as inline function, but I >> didn't see a strong need to comment on that. > > It felt a bit misplaced to put such generic selftest function in a > smoc.c file, and I didn't feel like introducing a new test.c file just > for that. I don't have a strong opinion however, if you think it's > better to go in smoc.c I'm happy with that.
My view: smoc.c would be wrong. Then it's better to have no wrapper (for now). Jan
