Re: tools/testing/selftests/kvm/rseq_test and glibc 2.35

Gavin Shan
2022-08-09T04:22:45Z

On 8/9/22 1:58 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> On 8/9/22 10:57 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>> On 8/9/22 2:01 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>> It has come to my attention that the KVM rseq test apparently needs to
>>>> be ported to glibc 2.35.  The background is that on aarch64, rseq is the
>>>> only way to get a practically useful sched_getcpu.  (There's no hidden
>>>> per-task CPU state the vDSO could reveal as the CPU ID.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, kvm/selftests/rseq needs to support glibc 2.35. The question is
>>> about glibc 2.34 or 2.35 because kvm/selftest/rseq fails on glibc 2.34
>>>
>>> I would guess upstream-glibc-2.35 feature is enabled on downstream
>>> glibc-2.34?
>>>
>>> # ./rseq_test
>>> ==== Test Assertion Failure ====
>>>     rseq_test.c:60: !r
>>>     pid=112043 tid=112043 errno=22 - Invalid argument
>>>        1    0x0000000000401973: main at rseq_test.c:226
>>>        2    0x0000ffff84b6c79b: ?? ??:0
>>>        3    0x0000ffff84b6c86b: ?? ??:0
>>>        4    0x0000000000401b6f: _start at ??:?
>>>     rseq failed, errno = 22 (Invalid argument)
>>> # rpm -aq | grep glibc-2
>>> glibc-2.34-39.el9.aarch64
>>>
>>>
>>>> The main rseq tests have already been adjusted via:
>>>>
>>>> commit 233e667e1ae3e348686bd9dd0172e62a09d852e1
>>>> Author: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>>>> Date:   Mon Jan 24 12:12:45 2022 -0500
>>>>
>>>>       selftests/rseq: Uplift rseq selftests for compatibility with glibc-2.35
>>>>       glibc-2.35 (upcoming release date 2022-02-01) exposes the rseq per-thread
>>>>       data in the TCB, accessible at an offset from the thread pointer, rather
>>>>       than through an actual Thread-Local Storage (TLS) variable, as the
>>>>       Linux kernel selftests initially expected.
>>>>       The __rseq_abi TLS and glibc-2.35's ABI for per-thread data cannot
>>>>       actively coexist in a process, because the kernel supports only a single
>>>>       rseq registration per thread.
>>>>       Here is the scheme introduced to ensure selftests can work both with an
>>>>       older glibc and with glibc-2.35+:
>>>>       - librseq exposes its own "rseq_offset, rseq_size, rseq_flags" ABI.
>>>>       - librseq queries for glibc rseq ABI (__rseq_offset, __rseq_size,
>>>>         __rseq_flags) using dlsym() in a librseq library constructor. If those
>>>>         are found, copy their values into rseq_offset, rseq_size, and
>>>>         rseq_flags.
>>>>       - Else, if those glibc symbols are not found, handle rseq registration
>>>>         from librseq and use its own IE-model TLS to implement the rseq ABI
>>>>         per-thread storage.
>>>>       Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>>>>       Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
>>>>       Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220124171253.22072-8-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
>>>>
>>>> But I don't see a similar adjustment for
>>>> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/rseq_test.c.  As an additional wrinkle,
>>>> you'd have to start calling getcpu (glibc function or system call)
>>>> because comparing rseq.cpu_id against sched_getcpu won't test anything
>>>> anymore once glibc implements sched_getcpu using rseq.
>>>>
>>>> We noticed this because our downstream glibc version, while based on
>>>> 2.34, enables rseq registration by default.  To facilitate coordination
>>>> with rseq application usage, we also backported the __rseq_* ABI
>>>> symbols, so the selftests could use that even in our downstream version.
>>>> (We enable the glibc tunables downstream, but they are an optional
>>>> glibc feature, so it's probably better in the long run to fix the kernel
>>>> selftests rather than using the tunables as a workaround.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the pointer. It makes sense. So it means rseq registration has
>>> been done by glibc TLS? In this case, kvm/selftests/rseq is unable to
>>> register again.
>>
>> The registration is done by glibc initialization and thread startup code.
>>
>>>
>>> I will come up something similiar for kvm/selftest/rseq.
>>
>> Make sure to chech the rseq selftests fixes recently pulled in the current merge window as well. One is relevant:
>>
>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d1a997ba4c1bf65497d956aea90de42a6398f73a
>>
>> We may want to find a way to remove this duplicated rseq.c code eventually.
>>
>
> Thanks, Mathieu. The check for 'rseq-size' will be included either. I almost
> have something working. I will post the fixes after some tests.
>

Mathieu and Florian, the fixes have been posted. It would be nice for you
to review if you have free cycles :)

https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20220809060627.115847-1-gshan@redhat.com/T/#t

Thanks,
Gavin