From: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@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 v2 2/3] s390x/spec_ex: Add test introducing odd address into PSW
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 16:21:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230314162155.45e8c6f1@p-imbrenda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230221174822.1378667-3-nsg@linux.ibm.com>
On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:48:21 +0100
Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Instructions on s390 must be halfword aligned.
> Introducing an odd instruction address into the PSW leads to a
> specification exception when attempting to execute the instruction at
> the odd address.
> Add a test for this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> s390x/spec_ex.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/s390x/spec_ex.c b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> index 2adc5996..a26c56aa 100644
> --- a/s390x/spec_ex.c
> +++ b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> @@ -88,12 +88,23 @@ static void expect_invalid_psw(struct psw psw)
> invalid_psw_expected = true;
> }
>
> +static void clear_invalid_psw(void)
> +{
> + expected_psw = PSW(0, 0);
> + invalid_psw_expected = false;
> +}
> +
> static int check_invalid_psw(void)
> {
> /* Since the fixup sets this to false we check for false here. */
> if (!invalid_psw_expected) {
> + /*
> + * Early exception recognition: pgm_int_id == 0.
> + * Late exception recognition: psw address has been
> + * incremented by pgm_int_id (unpredictable value)
> + */
> if (expected_psw.mask == invalid_psw.mask &&
> - expected_psw.addr == invalid_psw.addr)
> + expected_psw.addr == invalid_psw.addr - lowcore.pgm_int_id)
> return 0;
> report_fail("Wrong invalid PSW");
> } else {
> @@ -112,6 +123,42 @@ static int psw_bit_12_is_1(void)
> return check_invalid_psw();
> }
>
> +extern char misaligned_code[];
> +asm ( ".balign 2\n"
which section will this end up in?
> +" . = . + 1\n"
> +"misaligned_code:\n"
> +" larl %r0,0\n"
> +" bcr 0xf,%r1\n"
you should just use
br %r1
it's shorter and easier to understand
> +);
> +
> +static int psw_odd_address(void)
> +{
> + struct psw odd = PSW_WITH_CUR_MASK((uint64_t)&misaligned_code);
> + uint64_t executed_addr;
> +
> + expect_invalid_psw(odd);
> + fixup_psw.mask = extract_psw_mask();
> + asm volatile ( "xr %%r0,%%r0\n"
> + " larl %%r1,0f\n"
> + " stg %%r1,%[fixup_addr]\n"
> + " lpswe %[odd_psw]\n"
> + "0: lr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
> + : [fixup_addr] "=&T" (fixup_psw.addr),
> + [executed_addr] "=d" (executed_addr)
> + : [odd_psw] "Q" (odd)
> + : "cc", "%r0", "%r1"
> + );
> +
> + if (!executed_addr) {
> + return check_invalid_psw();
> + } else {
> + assert(executed_addr == odd.addr);
> + clear_invalid_psw();
> + report_fail("did not execute unaligned instructions");
> + return 1;
> + }
> +}
> +
> /* A short PSW needs to have bit 12 set to be valid. */
> static int short_psw_bit_12_is_0(void)
> {
> @@ -170,6 +217,7 @@ struct spec_ex_trigger {
> static const struct spec_ex_trigger spec_ex_triggers[] = {
> { "psw_bit_12_is_1", &psw_bit_12_is_1, false, &fixup_invalid_psw },
> { "short_psw_bit_12_is_0", &short_psw_bit_12_is_0, false, &fixup_invalid_psw },
> + { "psw_odd_address", &psw_odd_address, false, &fixup_invalid_psw },
> { "bad_alignment", &bad_alignment, true, NULL },
> { "not_even", ¬_even, true, NULL },
> { NULL, NULL, false, NULL },
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-14 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230221174822.1378667-1-nsg@linux.ibm.com>
2023-02-21 17:48 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 1/3] s390x/spec_ex: Use PSW macro Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-21 17:50 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-23 10:09 ` Janosch Frank
2023-02-21 17:48 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 2/3] s390x/spec_ex: Add test introducing odd address into PSW Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-03-14 15:21 ` Claudio Imbrenda [this message]
2023-03-15 13:48 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-21 17:48 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/3] s390x/spec_ex: Add test of EXECUTE with odd target address Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-03-14 15:25 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-03-14 16:41 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-03-14 17:12 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-03-14 17:59 ` Nina 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=20230314162155.45e8c6f1@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=nsg@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