From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com,
david@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/3] s390x: mvpg: Add SIE mvpg test
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:56:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45fd9a65-f7cd-3159-42fb-0cd69131b2b6@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af215884-ad72-7e2e-cbc7-55a4bd0ee688@redhat.com>
On 7/5/21 11:52 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 05/07/2021 11.37, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> On 7/5/21 9:24 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 29/06/2021 15.18, Janosch Frank 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 | 2 +
>>>> s390x/mvpg-sie.c | 151 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c | 33 +++++++
>>>> s390x/unittests.cfg | 3 +
>>>> 4 files changed, 189 insertions(+)
>>>> 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 ba32f4c..07af26d 100644
>>>> --- a/s390x/Makefile
>>>> +++ b/s390x/Makefile
>>>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ tests += $(TEST_DIR)/sie.elf
>>>> tests += $(TEST_DIR)/mvpg.elf
>>>> tests += $(TEST_DIR)/uv-host.elf
>>>> tests += $(TEST_DIR)/edat.elf
>>>> +tests += $(TEST_DIR)/mvpg-sie.elf
>>>>
>>>> tests_binary = $(patsubst %.elf,%.bin,$(tests))
>>>> ifneq ($(HOST_KEY_DOCUMENT),)
>>>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ snippet_asmlib = $(SNIPPET_DIR)/c/cstart.o
>>>>
>>>> # perquisites (=guests) for the snippet hosts.
>>>> # $(TEST_DIR)/<snippet-host>.elf: snippets = $(SNIPPET_DIR)/<c/asm>/<snippet>.gbin
>>>> +$(TEST_DIR)/mvpg-sie.elf: snippets = $(SNIPPET_DIR)/c/mvpg-snippet.gbin
>>>>
>>>> $(SNIPPET_DIR)/asm/%.gbin: $(SNIPPET_DIR)/asm/%.o $(FLATLIBS)
>>>> $(OBJCOPY) -O binary $(patsubst %.gbin,%.o,$@) $@
>>>> diff --git a/s390x/mvpg-sie.c b/s390x/mvpg-sie.c
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..3536c6a
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/s390x/mvpg-sie.c
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@
>>>> +#include <libcflat.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
>>>> +#include <asm-generic/barrier.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/pgtable.h>
>>>> +#include <mmu.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/page.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/facility.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/mem.h>
>>>> +#include <alloc_page.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;
>>>> +static uint8_t *cmp;
>>>> +
>>>> +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 sie(struct vm *vm)
>>>> +{
>>>> + /* Reset icptcode so we don't trip over it below */
>>>> + vm->sblk->icptcode = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + while (vm->sblk->icptcode == 0) {
>>>> + sie64a(vm->sblk, &vm->save_area);
>>>> + if (vm->sblk->icptcode == ICPT_VALIDITY)
>>>> + assert(0);
>>>
>>> Please replace the above two lines with:
>>>
>>> assert(vm->sblk->icptcode != ICPT_VALIDITY);
>>
>> Sure
>>
>>>
>>>> + }
>>>> + 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");
>>>> +
>>>> + report_prefix_push("src");
>>>> + memset(dst, 0, PAGE_SIZE);
>>>> + protect_page(src, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
>>>> + sie(&vm);
>>>> + report(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_PARTEXEC, "Partial execution");
>>>> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_src == (uintptr_t)src + PAGE_ENTRY_I, "PEI_SRC correct");
>>>> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_dst == (uintptr_t)dst, "PEI_DST correct");
>>>> + unprotect_page(src, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
>>>> + report(!memcmp(cmp, dst, PAGE_SIZE), "Destination intact");
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * We need to execute the diag44 which is used as a blocker
>>>> + * behind the mvpg. It makes sure we fail the tests above if
>>>> + * the mvpg wouldn't have intercepted.
>>>> + */
>>>> + sie(&vm);
>>>> + /* Make sure we intercepted for the diag44 and nothing else */
>>>> + assert(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_INST &&
>>>> + vm.sblk->ipa == 0x8300 && vm.sblk->ipb == 0x440000);
>>>> + report_prefix_pop();
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Clear PEI data for next check */
>>>> + report_prefix_push("dst");
>>>> + memset((uint64_t *)((uintptr_t) vm.sblk + 0xc0), 0, 16);
>>>> + memset(dst, 0, PAGE_SIZE);
>>>> + protect_page(dst, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
>>>> + sie(&vm);
>>>> + report(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_PARTEXEC, "Partial execution");
>>>> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_src == (uintptr_t)src, "PEI_SRC correct");
>>>> + report((uintptr_t)**pei_dst == (uintptr_t)dst + PAGE_ENTRY_I, "PEI_DST correct");
>>>> + /* Needed for the memcmp and general cleanup */
>>>> + unprotect_page(dst, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
>>>> + report(!memcmp(cmp, dst, PAGE_SIZE), "Destination intact");
>>>> + report_prefix_pop();
>>>> +
>>>> + report_prefix_pop();
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> Still quite a lot of magic values in above code ... any chance to introduce
>>> some #defines finally?
>>
>> Currently not really.
>> I added a comment for the diag 44 which should be enough right now. If
>> needed I can add a comment to the pei variables as well.
>
> Ok, fine for me, we can still clean up later if necessary. Thus with the
> assert() fixed and the mb() removed:
>
> Acked-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>
Thanks, I'll fix this up and queue the series
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-05 9:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-29 13:18 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 0/3] s390x: Add snippet support Janosch Frank
2021-06-29 13:18 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 1/3] s390x: snippets: Add gitignore as well as linker script and start assembly Janosch Frank
2021-07-04 16:42 ` Thomas Huth
2021-06-29 13:18 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 2/3] s390x: snippets: Add snippet compilation Janosch Frank
2021-06-29 13:18 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/3] s390x: mvpg: Add SIE mvpg test Janosch Frank
2021-07-05 7:24 ` Thomas Huth
2021-07-05 9:37 ` Janosch Frank
2021-07-05 9:52 ` Thomas Huth
2021-07-05 9:56 ` Janosch Frank [this message]
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=45fd9a65-f7cd-3159-42fb-0cd69131b2b6@linux.ibm.com \
--to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=imbrenda@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