From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f201.google.com (mail-pf1-f201.google.com [209.85.210.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3493523ED69 for ; Fri, 30 May 2025 19:59:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748635182; cv=none; b=ncWmbf6xn3ub9Yo70XHCF2Zkzzm+9nO06kJ3eoVcwGTDJf7PgDhXZgiO5BO+KzqpH8QypMl/houRZAjui6ZVA83NZJY0WNWmvWg4mj1w86v7EN0YzM/sLKVTBV+8h2MPaVodxt+9OoEuN4q7FOPH6JyYC6tO1U2ePOyljKseOaI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748635182; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tgIdWJfTfE8Hk6gr53VjRErzclr/ehhtTPonwVJQzZU=; h=Date:In-Reply-To:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=poWBLJXeeKBlJiMUKDlkIhsBMrS2jYSC39v7l+YkR+gSAFYp0cVcxGhdFEo+IRbEFJ1lL1MP5RvGS4M4ZpcTviOgyxeh9Xc0P4lBYUFkz3LllJZMz7+OnQ4O/t2VUS2DpPXcZ3x1CZQfLQ9P8dSEddIPB9Cg2MNUoLdpAWj4xzM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--ackerleytng.bounces.google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=F9D/kUeg; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--ackerleytng.bounces.google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="F9D/kUeg" Received: by mail-pf1-f201.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-747cebffd4eso141037b3a.2 for ; Fri, 30 May 2025 12:59:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1748635180; x=1749239980; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XLJX3ZuweedNmIpG0KUncbRpuBe5C8PWGGVckjGFyc8=; b=F9D/kUegV8910/prF+INDnPe8c9BE1061VP7JvND8IZpyP0j+8uTXEAO0Nxb8+C0OM 1bzfLxSxsy3sywmTxDWyi8Dfxq5wbWiUkFjX5tJtzzR8lFT6uEetwcNT9RTLmo+nAo2x YcLCv1OQIfuG83Fo23vs7Q9in8TIUcTlBXuGP+Uqiex5LT4SX2FuG4951ldNl7fODrBo Bz6VhSVWivKGs+0K7voQkP9dxVA7D/0nR1yfeWvOF6U5TTyhiatYHC1ssEC7wpafDa8p K1Cx3lYd1nWJEN7RVcqovQKQPo+BFYOqzZToKSvrhUPXuIGocEX4jRFVRLnkHdTsdSmz C2wg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1748635180; x=1749239980; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XLJX3ZuweedNmIpG0KUncbRpuBe5C8PWGGVckjGFyc8=; b=gf4CSjqtsOCq8kKIWYJg/4nTRYKf9vMW4slUkKFvaRT+x8nlZe99zTQtBzd5DENqUl yediZ/k5k/CYKgT4FZX0Bkwn31FY8vO9tmROMHYa08fyEbfG7LGLD+v8a/iFZF5IGgzR XkI5o8V7RnFwIayGuYl7eCIZuV6dR1IOUtc4FFTRubIjvlCnc8iyhBYA2rW+676FtbD6 HrV1G1ICgaFmfWoRJhZRgRr8ORVuO8Bt5QGm24u+WTtCcsi6pmnODcnhOF5w41Wcs99R 3xEEANH1mhTHB+M3qT6Bc28NegewXAyzPvOLWHx7APzwT1prtJpUSOWv4T1bwZGwdxAt ckGQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX5tC4PWNjtul63WDeHe3qVFZuTZ+7DsO4ZB8SVabHA3An5zz0hWPdvCc/dibaCPqsdusMkbss3HbREm5J5@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyGGY371YGGe3hKsff+6LgIqGzrN/ZH0QrsmCxXGWGgn4OCrIMu RfDfv+k/6tzkiUV98zceWF4kdjHGqmzggCysojCqzaNDibkKiN7xLeGvv7DUbRa0ddphEFH0z/D w+stoPt+40YH431uaa0DhyuNWGw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFFhC3hXX+PVrgQzetLdBECprnA1DEgPQOOh2/WyOZiyyWJYJHQsUMyh+zMD4P5Er1nSHhtcou8zoPt2CfFVA== X-Received: from pfoh25.prod.google.com ([2002:aa7:86d9:0:b0:744:671f:ab5c]) (user=ackerleytng job=prod-delivery.src-stubby-dispatcher) by 2002:a05:6a00:2303:b0:742:ae7e:7da8 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-747bd96e16emr6946361b3a.8.1748635180286; Fri, 30 May 2025 12:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 12:59:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1c5cfc23-3f63-404d-a4bf-030c24412b20@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <65afac3b13851c442c72652904db6d5755299615.1747264138.git.ackerleytng@google.com> <6825f0f3ac8a7_337c392942d@iweiny-mobl.notmuch> <1c5cfc23-3f63-404d-a4bf-030c24412b20@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 03/51] KVM: selftests: Update guest_memfd_test for INIT_PRIVATE flag From: Ackerley Tng To: Binbin Wu , Ira Weiny Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, aik@amd.com, ajones@ventanamicro.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, amoorthy@google.com, anthony.yznaga@oracle.com, anup@brainfault.org, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, bfoster@redhat.com, brauner@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, chao.p.peng@intel.com, chenhuacai@kernel.org, dave.hansen@intel.com, david@redhat.com, dmatlack@google.com, dwmw@amazon.co.uk, erdemaktas@google.com, fan.du@intel.com, fvdl@google.com, graf@amazon.com, haibo1.xu@intel.com, hch@infradead.org, hughd@google.com, isaku.yamahata@intel.com, jack@suse.cz, james.morse@arm.com, jarkko@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, jgowans@amazon.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com, jroedel@suse.de, jthoughton@google.com, jun.miao@intel.com, kai.huang@intel.com, keirf@google.com, kent.overstreet@linux.dev, kirill.shutemov@intel.com, liam.merwick@oracle.com, maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com, mail@maciej.szmigiero.name, maz@kernel.org, mic@digikod.net, michael.roth@amd.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, muchun.song@linux.dev, nikunj@amd.com, nsaenz@amazon.es, oliver.upton@linux.dev, palmer@dabbelt.com, pankaj.gupta@amd.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, pdurrant@amazon.co.uk, peterx@redhat.com, pgonda@google.com, pvorel@suse.cz, qperret@google.com, quic_cvanscha@quicinc.com, quic_eberman@quicinc.com, quic_mnalajal@quicinc.com, quic_pderrin@quicinc.com, quic_pheragu@quicinc.com, quic_svaddagi@quicinc.com, quic_tsoni@quicinc.com, richard.weiyang@gmail.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, rientjes@google.com, roypat@amazon.co.uk, rppt@kernel.org, seanjc@google.com, shuah@kernel.org, steven.price@arm.com, steven.sistare@oracle.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, tabba@google.com, thomas.lendacky@amd.com, usama.arif@bytedance.com, vannapurve@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, vkuznets@redhat.com, wei.w.wang@intel.com, will@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, xiaoyao.li@intel.com, yan.y.zhao@intel.com, yilun.xu@intel.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com, zhiquan1.li@intel.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Binbin Wu writes: > On 5/17/2025 1:42 AM, Ackerley Tng wrote: >> Ira Weiny writes: >> >>> Ackerley Tng wrote: >>>> Test that GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE is only valid when >>>> GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED is set. >>>> >>>> Change-Id: I506e236a232047cfaee17bcaed02ee14c8d25bbb >>>> Signed-off-by: Ackerley Tng >>>> --- >>>> .../testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c | 36 ++++++++++++------- >>>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c >>>> index 60aaba5808a5..bf2876cbd711 100644 >>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c >>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c >>>> @@ -401,13 +401,31 @@ static void test_with_type(unsigned long vm_type, uint64_t guest_memfd_flags, >>>> kvm_vm_release(vm); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static void test_vm_with_gmem_flag(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint64_t flag, >>>> + bool expect_valid) >>>> +{ >>>> + size_t page_size = getpagesize(); >>>> + int fd; >>>> + >>>> + fd = __vm_create_guest_memfd(vm, page_size, flag); >>>> + >>>> + if (expect_valid) { >>>> + TEST_ASSERT(fd > 0, >>>> + "guest_memfd() with flag '0x%lx' should be valid", >>>> + flag); >>>> + close(fd); >>>> + } else { >>>> + TEST_ASSERT(fd == -1 && errno == EINVAL, >>>> + "guest_memfd() with flag '0x%lx' should fail with EINVAL", >>>> + flag); >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> static void test_vm_type_gmem_flag_validity(unsigned long vm_type, >>>> uint64_t expected_valid_flags) >>>> { >>>> - size_t page_size = getpagesize(); >>>> struct kvm_vm *vm; >>>> uint64_t flag = 0; >>>> - int fd; >>>> >>>> if (!(kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_VM_TYPES) & BIT(vm_type))) >>>> return; >>>> @@ -415,17 +433,11 @@ static void test_vm_type_gmem_flag_validity(unsigned long vm_type, >>>> vm = vm_create_barebones_type(vm_type); >>>> >>>> for (flag = BIT(0); flag; flag <<= 1) { >>>> - fd = __vm_create_guest_memfd(vm, page_size, flag); >>>> + test_vm_with_gmem_flag(vm, flag, flag & expected_valid_flags); >>>> >>>> - if (flag & expected_valid_flags) { >>>> - TEST_ASSERT(fd > 0, >>>> - "guest_memfd() with flag '0x%lx' should be valid", >>>> - flag); >>>> - close(fd); >>>> - } else { >>>> - TEST_ASSERT(fd == -1 && errno == EINVAL, >>>> - "guest_memfd() with flag '0x%lx' should fail with EINVAL", >>>> - flag); >>>> + if (flag == GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED) { >>>> + test_vm_with_gmem_flag( >>>> + vm, flag | GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE, true); >>> I don't understand the point of this check. In 2/51 we set >>> GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE when GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED is set. >>> >>> When can this check ever fail? >>> >>> Ira >> In 02/51, GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE is not set by default, >> GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE is set as one of the valid_flags. >> >> The intention is that GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE is only valid if >> GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED is requested by userspace. >> >> In this test, the earlier part before the if block calls >> test_vm_with_gmem_flag() all valid flags, and that already tests >> GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED individually. >> >> Specifically if GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED is set, this if block >> adds a test for when both GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED and >> GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE are set, and sets that expect_valid is >> true. > Maybe it's more clear to move this case out of the loop? > Will try that in the next revision. Thanks! >> >> This second test doesn't fail, it is meant to check that the kernel >> allows the pair of flags to be set. Hope that makes sense.