From: linuxram at us.ibm.com (Ram Pai)
Subject: [PATCH v13 00/24] selftests, powerpc, x86 : Memory Protection Keys
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 17:58:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180615005854.GA5294@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c5c119b0-f5ca-4ddc-43c0-a6b597173973@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:19:11PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 06/14/2018 02:44 AM, Ram Pai wrote:
> >Test
> >----
> >Verified for correctness on powerpc. Need help verifying on x86.
> >Compiles on x86.
>
> It breaks make in tools/testing/selftests/x86:
>
> make: *** No rule to make target `protection_keys.c', needed by
> `/home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys_64'. Stop.
Ah.. it has to be taken out from the Makefile of
/home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/x86/
The sources have been moved to /home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/mm/
>
> The generic implementation no longer builds 32-bit binaries. Is
> this the intent?
No. But building it 32-bit after moving it to a the new directory
needs some special code in the Makefile.
>
> It's possible to build 32-bit binaries with “make CC='gcc -m32'”, so
> perhaps this is good enough?
Dave Hansen did mention it, but he did not complain too much. So I kept
quite.
>
> But with that, I get a warning:
>
> protection_keys.c: In function ‘dump_mem’:
> protection_keys.c:172:3: warning: format ‘%lx’ expects argument of
> type ‘long unsigned int’, but argument 4 has type ‘uint64_t’
> [-Wformat=]
> dprintf1("dump[%03d][@%p]: %016lx\n", i, ptr, *ptr);
> ^
>
> I suppose you could use %016llx and add a cast to unsigned long long
> to fix this.
yes.
>
> Anyway, both the 32-bit and 64-bit tests fail here:
>
> assert() at protection_keys.c::943 test_nr: 12 iteration: 1
> running abort_hooks()...
>
> I've yet checked what causes this. It's with the kernel headers
> from 4.17, but with other userspace headers based on glibc 2.17. I
> hope to look into this some more before the weekend, but I
> eventually have to return the test machine to the pool.
I wish I could get a x86 machine which could do memory keys. Had a AWS
instance, but struggled to boot my kernel. Can't get to the console...
gave up. If someone can give me a ready-made machine with support for
memkeys, I can quickly fix all the outstanding x86 issues. But if
someone can just fix it for me, .... ;)
RP
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linuxram@us.ibm.com (Ram Pai)
Subject: [PATCH v13 00/24] selftests, powerpc, x86 : Memory Protection Keys
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 17:58:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180615005854.GA5294@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20180615005854.0NwutMCivVBa_eaZz-NeAqBRhvs1Goz06MgdEAkvcFU@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c5c119b0-f5ca-4ddc-43c0-a6b597173973@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018@10:19:11PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 06/14/2018 02:44 AM, Ram Pai wrote:
> >Test
> >----
> >Verified for correctness on powerpc. Need help verifying on x86.
> >Compiles on x86.
>
> It breaks make in tools/testing/selftests/x86:
>
> make: *** No rule to make target `protection_keys.c', needed by
> `/home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys_64'. Stop.
Ah.. it has to be taken out from the Makefile of
/home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/x86/
The sources have been moved to /home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/mm/
>
> The generic implementation no longer builds 32-bit binaries. Is
> this the intent?
No. But building it 32-bit after moving it to a the new directory
needs some special code in the Makefile.
>
> It's possible to build 32-bit binaries with “make CC='gcc -m32'”, so
> perhaps this is good enough?
Dave Hansen did mention it, but he did not complain too much. So I kept
quite.
>
> But with that, I get a warning:
>
> protection_keys.c: In function ‘dump_mem’:
> protection_keys.c:172:3: warning: format ‘%lx’ expects argument of
> type ‘long unsigned int’, but argument 4 has type ‘uint64_t’
> [-Wformat=]
> dprintf1("dump[%03d][@%p]: %016lx\n", i, ptr, *ptr);
> ^
>
> I suppose you could use %016llx and add a cast to unsigned long long
> to fix this.
yes.
>
> Anyway, both the 32-bit and 64-bit tests fail here:
>
> assert() at protection_keys.c::943 test_nr: 12 iteration: 1
> running abort_hooks()...
>
> I've yet checked what causes this. It's with the kernel headers
> from 4.17, but with other userspace headers based on glibc 2.17. I
> hope to look into this some more before the weekend, but I
> eventually have to return the test machine to the pool.
I wish I could get a x86 machine which could do memory keys. Had a AWS
instance, but struggled to boot my kernel. Can't get to the console...
gave up. If someone can give me a ready-made machine with support for
memkeys, I can quickly fix all the outstanding x86 issues. But if
someone can just fix it for me, .... ;)
RP
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-15 0:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 98+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-14 0:44 [PATCH v13 00/24] selftests, powerpc, x86 : Memory Protection Keys linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 01/24] selftests/x86: Move protecton key selftest to arch neutral directory linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 02/24] selftests/vm: rename all references to pkru to a generic name linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 03/24] selftests/vm: move generic definitions to header file linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 04/24] selftests/vm: move arch-specific definitions to arch-specific header linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 05/24] selftests/vm: Make gcc check arguments of sigsafe_printf() linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 06/24] selftests/vm: typecast the pkey register linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 07/24] selftests/vm: generic function to handle shadow key register linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:44 ` [PATCH v13 08/24] selftests/vm: fix the wrong assert in pkey_disable_set() linuxram
2018-06-14 0:44 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 14:47 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 14:47 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 15:58 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 15:58 ` Ram Pai
2018-07-17 17:53 ` dave.hansen
2018-07-17 17:53 ` Dave Hansen
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 09/24] selftests/vm: fixed bugs in pkey_disable_clear() linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 10/24] selftests/vm: clear the bits in shadow reg when a pkey is freed linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 14:49 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 14:49 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 16:00 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 16:00 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 11/24] selftests/vm: fix alloc_random_pkey() to make it really random linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 12/24] selftests/vm: introduce two arch independent abstraction linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 13/24] selftests/vm: pkey register should match shadow pkey linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 14:53 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 14:53 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 16:02 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 16:02 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 14/24] selftests/vm: generic cleanup linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 14:57 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 14:57 ` Dave Hansen
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 15/24] selftests/vm: powerpc implementation for generic abstraction linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 15:06 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 15:06 ` Dave Hansen
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 16/24] selftests/vm: clear the bits in shadow reg when a pkey is freed linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 15:07 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 15:07 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 16:03 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 16:03 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 17/24] selftests/vm: powerpc implementation to check support for pkey linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 15:09 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 15:09 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 16:05 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 16:05 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 18/24] selftests/vm: fix an assertion in test_pkey_alloc_exhaust() linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 15:11 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 15:11 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 16:08 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 16:08 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 19/24] selftests/vm: associate key on a mapped page and detect access violation linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 15:16 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 15:16 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 16:13 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 16:13 ` Ram Pai
2018-07-17 17:56 ` dave.hansen
2018-07-17 17:56 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 19:10 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 19:10 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 20/24] selftests/vm: associate key on a mapped page and detect write violation linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 21/24] selftests/vm: detect write violation on a mapped access-denied-key page linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 22/24] selftests/vm: testcases must restore pkey-permissions linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 15:20 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 15:20 ` Dave Hansen
2018-07-17 16:09 ` linuxram
2018-07-17 16:09 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 23/24] selftests/vm: sub-page allocator linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-14 0:45 ` [PATCH v13 24/24] selftests/vm: test correct behavior of pkey-0 linuxram
2018-06-14 0:45 ` Ram Pai
2018-06-20 15:22 ` dave.hansen
2018-06-20 15:22 ` Dave Hansen
2018-06-14 20:19 ` [PATCH v13 00/24] selftests, powerpc, x86 : Memory Protection Keys fweimer
2018-06-14 20:19 ` Florian Weimer
2018-06-15 0:58 ` linuxram [this message]
2018-06-15 0:58 ` Ram Pai
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=20180615005854.GA5294@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com \
--to=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).