From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0339BC43466 for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 16:45:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A89723976 for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 16:45:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="V/6fut7r" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9A89723976 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=QTCYTKfZZ+r+DC27nAc9tAjL6Nsno37itjSRjOGdC5o=; b=V/6fut7rSlbXl28QRiP1JeJIz ZzXQSKXfA8e3RNNZqLUygfo3fuaoa1ZUUmyKDhLqht3Mbnnt8XrSYuTlkCX/hEyiRRwKX3Ao4OGzR gtnbpMz/DJmnRsfly9X4Goi/yv2d2RERKq8aecmxP3IyWf92Wkq/BpLV9g+oacj/AbqouSTbFtYVp eBWdwTnhqtvGM6ogXGjre/H31Pbm/UPnLz/12u+zXpFA4Ogc20rO6yhpbrh0+DPWJbfCb/rt8K9Yx IR3hx4/eYcDBPvyt7PReT6ETKMhALOehhLxNFlfLItbeqEcjjyi/4tqJRs2p8iD0Ko1cruXYpzRiu yhDgt7QgQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kKOug-0002rb-37; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 16:43:38 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kKOuc-0002r1-LO for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 16:43:36 +0000 Received: from gaia (unknown [31.124.44.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 91756238E6; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 16:43:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 17:43:30 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Amit Daniel Kachhap Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] kselftest/arm64: Add utilities and a test to validate mte memory Message-ID: <20200921164329.GD13882@gaia> References: <20200901092719.9918-1-amit.kachhap@arm.com> <20200901092719.9918-2-amit.kachhap@arm.com> <20200921141817.GC13882@gaia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200921141817.GC13882@gaia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200921_124334_774341_29016F51 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 26.06 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Gabor Kertesz , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Vincenzo Frascino , Will Deacon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 03:18:19PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 02:57:14PM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote: > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/mte_helper.S b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/mte_helper.S > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..91af6d1293f8 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/mte_helper.S > > @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@ > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > +/* Copyright (C) 2020 ARM Limited */ > > + > > +#include "mte_def.h" > > + > > +#define ENTRY(name) \ > > + .globl name ;\ > > + .p2align 2;\ > > + .type name, @function ;\ > > +name: > > + > > +#define ENDPROC(name) \ > > + .size name, .-name ; > > + > > + .text > > +/* > > + * mte_insert_random_tag: Insert random tag and different from > > + * the orginal tag if source pointer has it. > > + * Input: > > + * x0 - source pointer with a tag/no-tag > > + * Return: > > + * x0 - pointer with random tag > > + */ > > +ENTRY(mte_insert_random_tag) > > + mov x1, #0x0 > > + gmi x1, x0, x1 > > + irg x0, x0, x1 > > + ret > > +ENDPROC(mte_insert_random_tag) > > What was the reason for gmi here? The test fails when you have an > include mask of 0x8000 (exclude mask 0x7fff) and x0 has tag 0xf. In this > case we exclude the only allowed tag here, so the CPU falls back to the > default tag 0. > > You can (a) stop the check_multiple_included_tags() earlier to have two > allowed tags here, (b) clear the pointer old tag so that you don't end > up in this scenario or (c) simply remove the gmi. My preference is the > latter, we don't test the hardware here, we only want to check whether > the kernel sets the GCR_EL1 correctly. > > BTW, you also remove mov x1, #0, just: > > irg x0, x0, xzr Ah, removing gmi breaks the check_user_mem test as it occasionally gets the same tag when it expects to be different. I'll leave this to you to fix, maybe use two different functions, one with gmi and another without. In addition, could you please add the PR_MTE_* definitions and PROT_MTE to a header file in the MTE kselftests (mte-def.h maybe)? They should be bracketed with #ifndef ... #endif. The reason is that we'd like to queue these patches on their own branch on top of vanilla 5.9-rc3 rather than on top of for-next/mte. Thanks. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel