From: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] s390x: Test effect of storage keys on some instructions
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 15:30:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220224153041.5e99c0b3@p-imbrenda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220224110950.3401748-1-scgl@linux.ibm.com>
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022 12:09:50 +0100
Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Some instructions are emulated by KVM. Test that KVM correctly emulates
> storage key checking for two of those instructions (STORE CPU ADDRESS,
> SET PREFIX).
> Test success and error conditions, including coverage of storage and
> fetch protection override.
> Also add test for TEST PROTECTION, even if that instruction will not be
> emulated by KVM under normal conditions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> *entry_0_p = entry_pagebuf;
>
> I'm wondering if we need a barrier here, or would if set_prefix_key_1
> wasn't made up of an asm volatile. But the mmu code seems to not have a
> barrier in the equivalent code, so maybe it's never needed.
>
> set_prefix_key_1(0);
>
> lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h | 20 ++---
> s390x/skey.c | 169 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 180 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
> index 40626d72..e443a9cd 100644
> --- a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
> +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
> @@ -55,15 +55,17 @@ struct psw {
> #define PSW_MASK_BA 0x0000000080000000UL
> #define PSW_MASK_64 (PSW_MASK_BA | PSW_MASK_EA)
>
> -#define CTL0_LOW_ADDR_PROT (63 - 35)
> -#define CTL0_EDAT (63 - 40)
> -#define CTL0_IEP (63 - 43)
> -#define CTL0_AFP (63 - 45)
> -#define CTL0_VECTOR (63 - 46)
> -#define CTL0_EMERGENCY_SIGNAL (63 - 49)
> -#define CTL0_EXTERNAL_CALL (63 - 50)
> -#define CTL0_CLOCK_COMPARATOR (63 - 52)
> -#define CTL0_SERVICE_SIGNAL (63 - 54)
> +#define CTL0_LOW_ADDR_PROT (63 - 35)
> +#define CTL0_EDAT (63 - 40)
> +#define CTL0_FETCH_PROTECTION_OVERRIDE (63 - 38)
> +#define CTL0_STORAGE_PROTECTION_OVERRIDE (63 - 39)
> +#define CTL0_IEP (63 - 43)
> +#define CTL0_AFP (63 - 45)
> +#define CTL0_VECTOR (63 - 46)
> +#define CTL0_EMERGENCY_SIGNAL (63 - 49)
> +#define CTL0_EXTERNAL_CALL (63 - 50)
> +#define CTL0_CLOCK_COMPARATOR (63 - 52)
> +#define CTL0_SERVICE_SIGNAL (63 - 54)
> #define CR0_EXTM_MASK 0x0000000000006200UL /* Combined external masks */
>
> #define CTL2_GUARDED_STORAGE (63 - 59)
> diff --git a/s390x/skey.c b/s390x/skey.c
> index 58a55436..6ae2d026 100644
> --- a/s390x/skey.c
> +++ b/s390x/skey.c
> @@ -10,7 +10,10 @@
> #include <libcflat.h>
> #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> #include <asm/interrupt.h>
> +#include <vmalloc.h>
> +#include <mmu.h>
> #include <asm/page.h>
> +#include <asm/pgtable.h>
> #include <asm/facility.h>
> #include <asm/mem.h>
>
> @@ -147,6 +150,167 @@ static void test_invalid_address(void)
> report_prefix_pop();
> }
>
> +static void test_test_protection(void)
> +{
> + unsigned long addr = (unsigned long)pagebuf;
> +
> + report_prefix_push("TPROT");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x10, 0);
> + report(tprot(addr, 0) == 0, "access key 0 -> no protection");
> + report(tprot(addr, 1) == 0, "access key matches -> no protection");
> + report(tprot(addr, 2) == 1, "access key mismatches, no fetch protection -> store protection");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x18, 0);
> + report(tprot(addr, 2) == 2, "access key mismatches, fetch protection -> fetch & store protection");
> + report_prefix_pop();
is there a reason why you don't set the storage key back to 0 once
you're done?
> +}
> +
> +static void store_cpu_address_key_1(uint16_t *out)
> +{
> + asm volatile (
> + "spka 0x10(0)\n\t"
> + "stap %0\n\t"
> + "spka 0(0)\n"
> + : "=Q" (*out)
> + );
> +}
> +
> +static void test_store_cpu_address(void)
> +{
> + uint16_t *out = (uint16_t *)pagebuf;
> + uint16_t cpu_addr;
> +
> + asm ("stap %0" : "=Q" (cpu_addr));
> +
> + report_prefix_push("STORE CPU ADDRESS, zero key");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x20, 0);
> + *out = 0xbeef;
> + asm ("stap %0" : "=Q" (*out));
> + report(*out == cpu_addr, "store occurred");
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + report_prefix_push("STORE CPU ADDRESS, matching key");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x10, 0);
> + *out = 0xbeef;
> + store_cpu_address_key_1(out);
> + report(*out == cpu_addr, "store occurred");
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + report_prefix_push("STORE CPU ADDRESS, mismatching key");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x20, 0);
> + expect_pgm_int();
> + store_cpu_address_key_1(out);
> + check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_PROTECTION);
for completeness, maybe also check that nothing gets stored?
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + ctl_set_bit(0, CTL0_STORAGE_PROTECTION_OVERRIDE);
> +
> + report_prefix_push("STORE CPU ADDRESS, storage-protection override, invalid key");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x20, 0);
> + expect_pgm_int();
> + store_cpu_address_key_1(out);
> + check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_PROTECTION);
same here
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + report_prefix_push("STORE CPU ADDRESS, storage-protection override, override key");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x90, 0);
> + *out = 0xbeef;
> + store_cpu_address_key_1(out);
> + report(*out == cpu_addr, "override occurred");
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + ctl_clear_bit(0, CTL0_STORAGE_PROTECTION_OVERRIDE);
> +}
> +
> +static void set_prefix_key_1(uint32_t *out)
> +{
> + asm volatile (
> + "spka 0x10(0)\n\t"
> + "spx %0\n\t"
> + "spka 0(0)\n"
> + : "=Q" (*out)
> + );
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * We remapped page 0, making the lowcore inaccessible, which breaks the normal
> + * hanlder and breaks skipping the faulting instruction.
> + * Just disable dynamic address translation to make things work.
> + */
> +static void dat_fixup_pgm_int(void)
> +{
> + uint64_t psw_mask = extract_psw_mask();
> +
> + psw_mask &= ~PSW_MASK_DAT;
> + load_psw_mask(psw_mask);
> +}
> +
> +static void test_set_prefix(void)
> +{
> + uint32_t *out = (uint32_t *)pagebuf;
> + pgd_t *root;
> + pte_t *entry_0_p;
> + pte_t entry_lowcore, entry_pagebuf;
> +
> + root = (pgd_t *)(stctg(1) & PAGE_MASK);
> + entry_0_p = get_dat_entry(root, 0, pgtable_level_pte);
> + entry_lowcore = *entry_0_p;
> + entry_pagebuf = __pte((virt_to_pte_phys(root, out) & PAGE_MASK));
> +
> + asm volatile("stpx %0" : "=Q"(*out));
> +
> + report_prefix_push("SET PREFIX, zero key");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x20, 0);
> + asm volatile("spx %0" : "=Q" (*out));
> + report_pass("no exception");
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + report_prefix_push("SET PREFIX, matching key");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x10, 0);
> + set_prefix_key_1(out);
> + report_pass("no exception");
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + report_prefix_push("SET PREFIX, mismatching key, no fetch protection");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x20, 0);
> + set_prefix_key_1(out);
> + report_pass("no exception");
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + report_prefix_push("SET PREFIX, mismatching key, fetch protection");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x28, 0);
> + expect_pgm_int();
> + set_prefix_key_1(out);
> + check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_PROTECTION);
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + register_pgm_cleanup_func(dat_fixup_pgm_int);
> + ctl_set_bit(0, CTL0_FETCH_PROTECTION_OVERRIDE);
> +
> + report_prefix_push("SET PREFIX, mismatching key, fetch protection override applies");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x28, 0);
> + ipte(0, &pte_val(*entry_0_p));
> + *entry_0_p = entry_pagebuf;
> + set_prefix_key_1(0);
> + ipte(0, &pte_val(*entry_0_p));
> + *entry_0_p = entry_lowcore;
> + report_pass("no exception");
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + report_prefix_push("SET PREFIX, mismatching key, fetch protection override does not apply");
> + set_storage_key(pagebuf, 0x28, 0);
> + expect_pgm_int();
> + ipte(0, &pte_val(*entry_0_p));
> + *entry_0_p = entry_pagebuf;
> + set_prefix_key_1((uint32_t *)2048);
> + ipte(0, &pte_val(*entry_0_p));
> + *entry_0_p = entry_lowcore;
> + check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_PROTECTION);
> + report_prefix_pop();
> +
> + ctl_clear_bit(0, CTL0_FETCH_PROTECTION_OVERRIDE);
> + register_pgm_cleanup_func(NULL);
> +}
> +
> int main(void)
> {
> report_prefix_push("skey");
> @@ -159,6 +323,11 @@ int main(void)
> test_set();
> test_set_mb();
> test_chg();
> + test_test_protection();
> + test_store_cpu_address();
> +
> + setup_vm();
> + test_set_prefix();
> done:
> report_prefix_pop();
> return report_summary();
>
> base-commit: 257c962f3d1b2d0534af59de4ad18764d734903a
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-24 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-24 11:09 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] s390x: Test effect of storage keys on some instructions Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-02-24 14:30 ` Claudio Imbrenda [this message]
2022-02-24 15:55 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
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=20220224153041.5e99c0b3@p-imbrenda \
--to=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=scgl@linux.ibm.com \
--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