On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 08:21:20PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > This feature has no traps associated with it so the SIGILL is not reliable. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <[email protected]> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c > b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c > index 002ec38a8bbb..941890f69df6 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/hwcap.c > @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@ > #include <asm/sigcontext.h> > #include <asm/unistd.h> > > +#include <linux/auxvec.h> > + > #include "../../kselftest.h" > > #define TESTS_PER_HWCAP 3 > @@ -169,6 +171,18 @@ static void lse128_sigill(void) > : "cc", "memory"); > } > > +static void lsfe_sigill(void) > +{ > + float __attribute__ ((aligned (16))) mem = 0; > + register float *memp asm ("x0") = &mem; > + > + /* LDFADD H0, H0, [X0] */ > + asm volatile(".inst 0x7c200000" > + : "+r" (memp)
Doesn't this corrupt H0 without the compiler knowing? It's probably easier to use STFADD. > + : > + : "cc", "memory"); Why do you need the "cc" clobber? Will
