From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
To: Arthur Chunqi Li <yzt356@gmail.com>
Cc: kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] kvm-unit-tests: VMX: Add test cases for CR0/4 shadowing
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 09:47:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <520C879B.30908@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABpY8MKho_fHe4XAFn73+QeFoFFgv1LET39JJkm15VnJckd2DQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10665 bytes --]
On 2013-08-15 09:40, Arthur Chunqi Li wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de> wrote:
>> On 2013-08-13 17:56, Arthur Chunqi Li wrote:
>>> Add testing for CR0/4 shadowing.
>>
>> A few sentences on the test strategy would be good.
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Arthur Chunqi Li <yzt356@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> lib/x86/vm.h | 4 +
>>> x86/vmx_tests.c | 218 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 222 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/x86/vm.h b/lib/x86/vm.h
>>> index eff6f72..6e0ce2b 100644
>>> --- a/lib/x86/vm.h
>>> +++ b/lib/x86/vm.h
>>> @@ -17,9 +17,13 @@
>>> #define PTE_ADDR (0xffffffffff000ull)
>>>
>>> #define X86_CR0_PE 0x00000001
>>> +#define X86_CR0_MP 0x00000002
>>> +#define X86_CR0_TS 0x00000008
>>> #define X86_CR0_WP 0x00010000
>>> #define X86_CR0_PG 0x80000000
>>> #define X86_CR4_VMXE 0x00000001
>>> +#define X86_CR4_TSD 0x00000004
>>> +#define X86_CR4_DE 0x00000008
>>> #define X86_CR4_PSE 0x00000010
>>> #define X86_CR4_PAE 0x00000020
>>> #define X86_CR4_PCIDE 0x00020000
>>> diff --git a/x86/vmx_tests.c b/x86/vmx_tests.c
>>> index 61b0cef..44be3f4 100644
>>> --- a/x86/vmx_tests.c
>>> +++ b/x86/vmx_tests.c
>>> @@ -5,12 +5,18 @@
>>>
>>> u64 ia32_pat;
>>> u64 ia32_efer;
>>> +u32 stage;
>>>
>>> static inline void vmcall()
>>> {
>>> asm volatile("vmcall");
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static inline void set_stage(u32 s)
>>> +{
>>> + asm volatile("mov %0, stage\n\t"::"r"(s):"memory", "cc");
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>> Why do we need "state = s" as assembler instruction?
> This is due to assembler optimization. If we simply use "state = s",
> assembler will sometimes optimize it and state may not be set indeed.
volatile u32 stage? And we have barrier() to avoid reordering.
>>
>>> void basic_init()
>>> {
>>> }
>>> @@ -257,6 +263,216 @@ static int test_ctrl_efer_exit_handler()
>>> return VMX_TEST_VMEXIT;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +u32 guest_cr0, guest_cr4;
>>> +
>>> +static void cr_shadowing_main()
>>> +{
>>> + u32 cr0, cr4, tmp;
>>> +
>>> + // Test read through
>>> + set_stage(0);
>>> + guest_cr0 = read_cr0();
>>> + if (stage == 1)
>>> + report("Read through CR0", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + vmcall();
>>> + set_stage(1);
>>> + guest_cr4 = read_cr4();
>>> + if (stage == 2)
>>> + report("Read through CR4", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + vmcall();
>>> + // Test write through
>>> + guest_cr0 = guest_cr0 ^ (X86_CR0_TS | X86_CR0_MP);
>>> + guest_cr4 = guest_cr4 ^ (X86_CR4_TSD | X86_CR4_DE);
>>> + set_stage(2);
>>> + write_cr0(guest_cr0);
>>> + if (stage == 3)
>>> + report("Write throuth CR0", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + vmcall();
>>> + set_stage(3);
>>> + write_cr4(guest_cr4);
>>> + if (stage == 4)
>>> + report("Write through CR4", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + vmcall();
>>> + // Test read shadow
>>> + set_stage(4);
>>> + vmcall();
>>> + cr0 = read_cr0();
>>> + if (stage != 5) {
>>> + if (cr0 == guest_cr0)
>>> + report("Read shadowing CR0", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Read shadowing CR0", 0);
>>> + }
>>> + set_stage(5);
>>> + cr4 = read_cr4();
>>> + if (stage != 6) {
>>> + if (cr4 == guest_cr4)
>>> + report("Read shadowing CR4", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Read shadowing CR4", 0);
>>> + }
>>> + // Test write shadow (same value with shadow)
>>> + set_stage(6);
>>> + write_cr0(guest_cr0);
>>> + if (stage == 7)
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR0 (same value with shadow)", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + vmcall();
>>> + set_stage(7);
>>> + write_cr4(guest_cr4);
>>> + if (stage == 8)
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR4 (same value with shadow)", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + vmcall();
>>> + // Test write shadow (different value)
>>> + set_stage(8);
>>> + tmp = guest_cr0 ^ X86_CR0_TS;
>>> + asm volatile("mov %0, %%rsi\n\t"
>>> + "mov %%rsi, %%cr0\n\t"
>>> + ::"m"(tmp)
>>> + :"rsi", "memory", "cc");
>>> + if (stage != 9)
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR0_TS", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR0_TS", 1);
>>> + set_stage(9);
>>> + tmp = guest_cr0 ^ X86_CR0_MP;
>>> + asm volatile("mov %0, %%rsi\n\t"
>>> + "mov %%rsi, %%cr0\n\t"
>>> + ::"m"(tmp)
>>> + :"rsi", "memory", "cc");
>>> + if (stage != 10)
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR0_MP", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR0_MP", 1);
>>> + set_stage(10);
>>> + tmp = guest_cr4 ^ X86_CR4_TSD;
>>> + asm volatile("mov %0, %%rsi\n\t"
>>> + "mov %%rsi, %%cr4\n\t"
>>> + ::"m"(tmp)
>>> + :"rsi", "memory", "cc");
>>> + if (stage != 11)
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR4_TSD", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR4_TSD", 1);
>>> + set_stage(11);
>>> + tmp = guest_cr4 ^ X86_CR4_DE;
>>> + asm volatile("mov %0, %%rsi\n\t"
>>> + "mov %%rsi, %%cr4\n\t"
>>> + ::"m"(tmp)
>>> + :"rsi", "memory", "cc");
>>> + if (stage != 12)
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR4_DE", 0);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write shadowing different X86_CR4_DE", 1);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int cr_shadowing_exit_handler()
>>> +{
>>> + u64 guest_rip;
>>> + ulong reason;
>>> + u32 insn_len;
>>> + u32 exit_qual;
>>> +
>>> + guest_rip = vmcs_read(GUEST_RIP);
>>> + reason = vmcs_read(EXI_REASON) & 0xff;
>>> + insn_len = vmcs_read(EXI_INST_LEN);
>>> + exit_qual = vmcs_read(EXI_QUALIFICATION);
>>> + switch (reason) {
>>> + case VMX_VMCALL:
>>> + switch (stage) {
>>> + case 0:
>>> + if (guest_cr0 == vmcs_read(GUEST_CR0))
>>> + report("Read through CR0", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Read through CR0", 0);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 1:
>>> + if (guest_cr4 == vmcs_read(GUEST_CR4))
>>> + report("Read through CR4", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Read through CR4", 0);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 2:
>>> + if (guest_cr0 == vmcs_read(GUEST_CR0))
>>> + report("Write through CR0", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write through CR0", 0);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 3:
>>> + if (guest_cr4 == vmcs_read(GUEST_CR4))
>>> + report("Write through CR4", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write through CR4", 0);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 4:
>>> + guest_cr0 = vmcs_read(GUEST_CR0) ^ (X86_CR0_TS | X86_CR0_MP);
>>> + guest_cr4 = vmcs_read(GUEST_CR4) ^ (X86_CR4_TSD | X86_CR4_DE);
>>> + vmcs_write(CR0_MASK, X86_CR0_TS | X86_CR0_MP);
>>> + vmcs_write(CR0_READ_SHADOW, guest_cr0 & (X86_CR0_TS | X86_CR0_MP));
>>> + vmcs_write(CR4_MASK, X86_CR4_TSD | X86_CR4_DE);
>>> + vmcs_write(CR4_READ_SHADOW, guest_cr4 & (X86_CR4_TSD | X86_CR4_DE));
>>> + break;
>>> + case 6:
>>> + if (guest_cr0 == (vmcs_read(GUEST_CR0) ^ (X86_CR0_TS | X86_CR0_MP)))
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR0 (same value)", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR0 (same value)", 0);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 7:
>>> + if (guest_cr4 == (vmcs_read(GUEST_CR4) ^ (X86_CR4_TSD | X86_CR4_DE)))
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR4 (same value)", 1);
>>> + else
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR4 (same value)", 0);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>
>> report("something went wrong", 0); ???
> Actually, we cannot reach here for any reason. If necessary, we can
> put an error message here.
It's always better to document this, specifically via code, instead of
letting the reader wonder.
>>
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + vmcs_write(GUEST_RIP, guest_rip + insn_len);
>>> + return VMX_TEST_RESUME;
>>> + case VMX_CR:
>>> + switch (stage) {
>>> + case 4:
>>> + report("Read shadowing CR0", 0);
>>> + set_stage(stage + 1);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 5:
>>> + report("Read shadowing CR4", 0);
>>> + set_stage(stage + 1);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 6:
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR0 (same value)", 0);
>>> + set_stage(stage + 1);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 7:
>>> + report("Write shadowing CR4 (same value)", 0);
>>> + set_stage(stage + 1);
>>> + break;
>>> + case 8:
>>> + case 9:
>>> + if (exit_qual == 0x600)
>>> + set_stage(stage + 1);
>>
>> What is this qualification about? Yes, ESI to CR0, but that takes a
>> manual to find out. And what if exit_qual is something else? Is that a
>> test error?
> For stage 9, it is a "MOV to CR0/4" vmexit, qualification indicates
> the detail of this exit. Take a look at the codes above of stage 9, I
> think it means a test error if exit_qual is something else.
Again, better make it clear in the code what the expected exit_qual
encodes and that any other value is an error.
Jan
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 263 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-15 7:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-13 15:56 [PATCH 0/4] kvm-unit-tests: Add a series of test cases Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-13 15:56 ` [PATCH 1/4] kvm-unit-tests: VMX: Add test cases for PAT and EFER Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 7:17 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 7:41 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 7:48 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 8:05 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 8:09 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-13 15:56 ` [PATCH 2/4] kvm-unit-tests: VMX: Add test cases for CR0/4 shadowing Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 7:30 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 7:40 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 7:47 ` Jan Kiszka [this message]
2013-08-15 7:59 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 8:07 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-18 14:07 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-08-18 14:32 ` Gmail
2013-08-13 15:56 ` [PATCH 3/4] kvm-unit-tests: VMX: Add test cases for I/O bitmaps Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 7:40 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 7:51 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 7:58 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 8:09 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 8:13 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 8:20 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 8:23 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 10:43 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-13 15:56 ` [PATCH 4/4] kvm-unit-tests: VMX: Add test cases for instruction interception Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 8:06 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 8:16 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 8:20 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 8:35 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 8:40 ` Jan Kiszka
2013-08-15 8:48 ` Arthur Chunqi Li
2013-08-15 9:15 ` Jan Kiszka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=520C879B.30908@web.de \
--to=jan.kiszka@web.de \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=yzt356@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox