Re: [PATCH 0/2] kselftest/arm64: Improvements to BTI tests on non-BTI systems

[Catalin Marinas]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 20:49:58 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> While looking at the BTI selftest results on a non-BTI system I noticed
> that not only are we printing invalid test numbers in that case, we're
> skipping running the tests entirely even though there's a well defined
> ABI we could be verifying and the code already knows what the results
> should be.
> 
> The first patch here is a fix to the reporting of test numbers when
> skipping, the second one just removes the skipping entirely in favour of
> a runtime check for what the result of a BTI binary should be.
> 
> [...]

Applied to arm64 (for-next/kselftest), thanks!

[1/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix test numbering when skipping tests
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/30792e7c18b6
[2/2] kselftest/arm64: Run BTI selftests on systems without BTI
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/1c3b614548b5

-- 
Catalin