[kvm-unit-tests PATCH v5 0/3] More skey instr. emulation test

[Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>]

Add test cases similar to those testing the effect of storage keys on
instructions emulated by KVM, but test instructions emulated by user
space/qemu instead.
Test that DIAG 308 is not subject to key protection.
Additionally, check the transaction exception identification on
protection exceptions.

This series is based on v3 of s390x: Rework TEID decoding and usage .

v4 -> v5
 * rebase onto v3 of TEID series
 * ignore ancient machines without at least ESOP-1

v3 -> v4
 * rebase on newest TEID decoding series
 * pick up r-b's (Thanks Claudio)
 * add check for protection code validity in case of basic SOP

v2 -> v3
 * move sclp patch and part of TEID test to series
       s390x: Rework TEID decoding and usage
 * make use of reworked TEID union in skey TEID test
 * get rid of pointer to array for diag 308 test
 * use lowcore symbol and mem_all
 * don't reset intparm when expecting exception in msch test

v1 -> v2
 * don't mixup sclp fix with new bits for the TEID patch
 * address feedback
       * cosmetic changes, i.e. shortening identifiers
       * remove unconditional report_info
 * add DIAG 308 test

Janis Schoetterl-Glausch (3):
  s390x: Test TEID values in storage key test
  s390x: Test effect of storage keys on some more instructions
  s390x: Test effect of storage keys on diag 308

 s390x/skey.c        | 379 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 s390x/unittests.cfg |   1 +
 2 files changed, 374 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Range-diff against v4:
1:  fbfd7e3b ! 1:  a30f2b45 s390x: Test TEID values in storage key test
    @@ s390x/skey.c: static void test_test_protection(void)
     +{
     +	union teid teid;
     +	int access_code;
    -+	bool dat;
     +
     +	check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_PROTECTION);
     +	report_prefix_push("TEID");
     +	teid.val = lowcore.trans_exc_id;
     +	switch (get_supp_on_prot_facility()) {
     +	case SOP_NONE:
    -+		break;
     +	case SOP_BASIC:
    -+		dat = extract_psw_mask() & PSW_MASK_DAT;
    -+		report(!teid.sop_teid_predictable || !dat || !teid.sop_acc_list,
    -+		       "valid protection code");
    ++		/* let's ignore ancient/irrelevant machines */
     +		break;
     +	case SOP_ENHANCED_1:
     +		report(!teid.sop_teid_predictable, "valid protection code");
    ++		/* no access code in case of key protection */
     +		break;
     +	case SOP_ENHANCED_2:
     +		switch (teid_esop2_prot_code(teid)) {
     +		case PROT_KEY:
    -+			access_code = teid.acc_exc_f_s;
    ++			/* ESOP-2: no need to check facility */
    ++			access_code = teid.acc_exc_fetch_store;
     +
     +			switch (access_code) {
     +			case 0:
    @@ s390x/skey.c: static void test_test_protection(void)
     +				break;
     +			}
     +			/* fallthrough */
    -+		case PROT_KEY_LAP:
    ++		case PROT_KEY_OR_LAP:
     +			report_pass("valid protection code");
     +			break;
     +		default:
2:  868bb863 = 2:  b194f716 s390x: Test effect of storage keys on some more instructions
3:  d49934c0 = 3:  460d77ec s390x: Test effect of storage keys on diag 308

base-commit: 610c15284a537484682adfb4b6d6313991ab954f
prerequisite-patch-id: bebbc71ca3cc8d085e36a049466dba5a420c9c75
prerequisite-patch-id: d38a4fc7bc1fa6e352502f294cb9413f0b738b99
prerequisite-patch-id: 15d25aaab40e81ad60a13218eaba370585c4a87e
-- 
2.36.1