From: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
To: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
david@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests RFC 2/2] s390x: mvpg: Add SIE mvpg test
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 19:37:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210525193751.5e6630c7@ibm-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210520094730.55759-3-frankja@linux.ibm.com>
On Thu, 20 May 2021 09:47:30 +0000
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Let's also check the PEI values to make sure our VSIE implementation
> is correct.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> s390x/Makefile | 3 +-
> s390x/mvpg-sie.c | 139
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c |
> 33 ++++++++ s390x/unittests.cfg | 3 +
> 4 files changed, 177 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 s390x/mvpg-sie.c
> create mode 100644 s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c
>
> diff --git a/s390x/Makefile b/s390x/Makefile
> index fe267011..6692cf73 100644
> --- a/s390x/Makefile
> +++ b/s390x/Makefile
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ tests += $(TEST_DIR)/uv-guest.elf
> tests += $(TEST_DIR)/sie.elf
> tests += $(TEST_DIR)/mvpg.elf
> tests += $(TEST_DIR)/uv-host.elf
> +tests += $(TEST_DIR)/mvpg-sie.elf
>
> tests_binary = $(patsubst %.elf,%.bin,$(tests))
> ifneq ($(HOST_KEY_DOCUMENT),)
> @@ -79,7 +80,7 @@ FLATLIBS = $(libcflat)
> SNIPPET_DIR = $(TEST_DIR)/snippets
>
> # C snippets that need to be linked
> -snippets-c =
> +snippets-c = $(SNIPPET_DIR)/c/mvpg-snippet.gbin
>
> # ASM snippets that are directly compiled and converted to a *.gbin
> snippets-a =
> diff --git a/s390x/mvpg-sie.c b/s390x/mvpg-sie.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..a617704b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/s390x/mvpg-sie.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
> +#include <libcflat.h>
> +#include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> +#include <asm-generic/barrier.h>
> +#include <asm/interrupt.h>
> +#include <asm/pgtable.h>
> +#include <mmu.h>
> +#include <asm/page.h>
> +#include <asm/facility.h>
> +#include <asm/mem.h>
> +#include <asm/sigp.h>
> +#include <smp.h>
> +#include <alloc_page.h>
> +#include <bitops.h>
> +#include <vm.h>
> +#include <sclp.h>
> +#include <sie.h>
> +
> +static u8 *guest;
> +static u8 *guest_instr;
> +static struct vm vm;
> +
> +static uint8_t *src;
> +static uint8_t *dst;
> +
> +extern const char _binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_start[];
> +extern const char _binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_end[];
> +int binary_size;
> +
> +static void handle_validity(struct vm *vm)
> +{
> + report(0, "VALIDITY: %x", vm->sblk->ipb >> 16);
I think an assert would be better. This should not happen, and if it
happens something went very wrong and we have no guarantee that we will
be able to continue
> +}
> +
> +static void sie(struct vm *vm)
> +{
> + /* Reset icptcode so we don't trip below */
> + vm->sblk->icptcode = 0;
> +
> + while (vm->sblk->icptcode == 0) {
> + sie64a(vm->sblk, &vm->save_area);
> + if (vm->sblk->icptcode == ICPT_VALIDITY)
> + handle_validity(vm);
> + }
> + vm->save_area.guest.grs[14] = vm->sblk->gg14;
> + vm->save_area.guest.grs[15] = vm->sblk->gg15;
> +}
> +
> +static void test_mvpg_pei(void)
> +{
> + uint64_t **pei_dst = (uint64_t **)((uintptr_t) vm.sblk +
> 0xc0);
> + uint64_t **pei_src = (uint64_t **)((uintptr_t) vm.sblk +
> 0xc8); +
> + report_prefix_push("pei");
maybe clear the destination buffer...
> + protect_page(guest + 0x6000, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
> + sie(&vm);
> + report(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_PARTEXEC, "Partial
> execution");
> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_src == ((uintptr_t)vm.sblk->mso) +
> 0x6000 + PAGE_ENTRY_I, "PEI_SRC correct");
> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_dst == vm.sblk->mso + 0x5000,
> "PEI_DST correct");
... and check that the page was not copied
> + /* Jump over the diag44 */
> + sie(&vm);
I would check if you really got a diag44
> + /* Clear PEI data for next check */
> + memset((uint64_t *)((uintptr_t) vm.sblk + 0xc0), 0, 16);
> + unprotect_page(guest + 0x6000, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
> + protect_page(guest + 0x5000, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
> + sie(&vm);
> + report(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_PARTEXEC, "Partial
> execution");
> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_src == vm.sblk->mso + 0x6000,
> "PEI_SRC correct");
> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_dst == vm.sblk->mso + 0x5000 +
> PAGE_ENTRY_I, "PEI_DST correct"); +
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +}
> +
> +static void test_mvpg(void)
> +{
> + int binary_size =
> ((uintptr_t)_binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_end -
> +
> (uintptr_t)_binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_start); +
> + memcpy(guest,
> _binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_start, binary_size);
> + memset(src, 0x42, PAGE_SIZE);
> + memset(dst, 0x43, PAGE_SIZE);
> + sie(&vm);
> + mb();
> + report(!memcmp(src, dst, PAGE_SIZE) && *dst == 0x42, "Page
or maybe you can clear the destination buffer here, if you prefer
> moved"); +}
> +
> +static void setup_guest(void)
> +{
> + setup_vm();
> +
> + /* Allocate 1MB as guest memory */
> + guest = alloc_pages(8);
> + /* The first two pages are the lowcore */
> + guest_instr = guest + PAGE_SIZE * 2;
> +
> + vm.sblk = alloc_page();
> +
> + vm.sblk->cpuflags = CPUSTAT_ZARCH | CPUSTAT_RUNNING;
> + vm.sblk->prefix = 0;
> + /*
> + * Pageable guest with the same ASCE as the test programm,
> but
> + * the guest memory 0x0 is offset to start at the allocated
> + * guest pages and end after 1MB.
> + *
> + * It's not pretty but faster and easier than managing guest
> ASCEs.
> + */
> + vm.sblk->mso = (u64)guest;
> + vm.sblk->msl = (u64)guest;
> + vm.sblk->ihcpu = 0xffff;
> +
> + vm.sblk->crycbd = (uint64_t)alloc_page();
> +
> + vm.sblk->gpsw.addr = PAGE_SIZE * 4;
> + vm.sblk->gpsw.mask = 0x0000000180000000ULL;
> + vm.sblk->ictl = ICTL_OPEREXC | ICTL_PINT;
> + /* Enable MVPG interpretation as we want to test KVM and not
> ourselves */
> + vm.sblk->eca = ECA_MVPGI;
> +
> + src = guest + PAGE_SIZE * 6;
> + dst = guest + PAGE_SIZE * 5;
> +}
> +
> +int main(void)
> +{
> + report_prefix_push("mvpg-sie");
> + if (!sclp_facilities.has_sief2) {
> + report_skip("SIEF2 facility unavailable");
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
> + setup_guest();
> + test_mvpg();
> + test_mvpg_pei();
> +
> +done:
> + report_prefix_pop();
> + return report_summary();
> +
> +}
> diff --git a/s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c
> b/s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..96b70c9c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
> +#include <libcflat.h>
> +
> +static inline void force_exit(void)
> +{
> + asm volatile(" diag 0,0,0x44\n");
> +}
> +
> +static inline int mvpg(unsigned long r0, void *dest, void *src)
> +{
> + register unsigned long reg0 asm ("0") = r0;
> + int cc;
> +
> + asm volatile(" mvpg %1,%2\n"
> + " ipm %0\n"
> + " srl %0,28"
> + : "=&d" (cc) : "a" (dest), "a" (src), "d" (reg0)
> + : "memory", "cc");
> + return cc;
> +}
> +
> +static void test_mvpg_real(void)
> +{
> + mvpg(0, (void *)0x5000, (void *)0x6000);
> + force_exit();
> +}
> +
> +__attribute__((section(".text"))) int main(void)
> +{
> + test_mvpg_real();
> + test_mvpg_real();
> + test_mvpg_real();
> + return 0;
> +}
> diff --git a/s390x/unittests.cfg b/s390x/unittests.cfg
> index 9f81a608..8634b1b1 100644
> --- a/s390x/unittests.cfg
> +++ b/s390x/unittests.cfg
> @@ -103,3 +103,6 @@ file = sie.elf
> [mvpg]
> file = mvpg.elf
> timeout = 10
> +
> +[mvpg-sie]
> +file = mvpg-sie.elf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-25 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-20 9:47 [kvm-unit-tests RFC 0/2] s390x: Add snippet support Janosch Frank
2021-05-20 9:47 ` [kvm-unit-tests RFC 1/2] s390x: Add guest " Janosch Frank
2021-05-25 16:44 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-05-26 10:12 ` Janosch Frank
2021-06-21 10:10 ` Thomas Huth
2021-06-21 12:19 ` Janosch Frank
2021-06-21 12:32 ` Thomas Huth
2021-06-21 12:39 ` Janosch Frank
2021-06-21 13:28 ` Thomas Huth
2021-06-21 14:42 ` Janosch Frank
2021-06-21 14:59 ` Thomas Huth
2021-05-20 9:47 ` [kvm-unit-tests RFC 2/2] s390x: mvpg: Add SIE mvpg test Janosch Frank
2021-05-25 17:37 ` Claudio Imbrenda [this message]
2021-05-26 10:17 ` Janosch Frank
2021-05-27 14:35 ` Janosch Frank
2021-06-21 10:23 ` Thomas Huth
2021-06-21 12:41 ` Janosch Frank
2021-05-20 13:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests RFC 0/2] s390x: Add snippet support David Hildenbrand
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=20210525193751.5e6630c7@ibm-vm \
--to=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).