From: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] fzsync: skip test when avaliable CPUs less than 2
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 09:01:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wny3md61.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEemH2fXpPXvQVi_UUovp+eB5JeWfdTjv47KXnCBhF=VG0Rsog@mail.gmail.com>
Hello,
Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com> writes:
> Hi Joerg,
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 3:53 PM Joerg Vehlow <lkml@jv-coder.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> >> No, af_alg07 requires 2 CPUs, otherwise it'll report false positives.
>> >> The test will pass only if fchownat() hits a half-closed socket and
>> >> returns error. But IIRC the half-closed socket will be destroyed during
>> >> reschedule which means there's no race window to hit anymore. But it
>> >> would be better to put the TCONF condition into the test itself.
>> > Interesting, I wonder if this is also true for the real-time kernel with
>> > the threads set to RT priority?
>> It looks like the test can fail even with more than one cpu. I've seen
>> this sporadic failure on different hardware with more than two cores, at
>> least on intel denverton (x86_64) and renesas r-car (aarch64) systems.
>> Both with kernel 4.19 with the fix included, on the denverton system the
>> rt parches were included and on the r-car not. The test passes most of
>> the time, but sometimes fails with the message Li posted.
>>
>> It also seems to fail sporadically on other systems as well:
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-kernel-tests/+bug/1892860
>>
>> Additionally I tested on qemu-x86 with 4.19 with and without rt patches.
>> The test succeeds even with only one virtualized cpu. So either Martin's
>> assumption is wrong or it holds only for newer kernel versions?
>>
>
> No, Mertin is not wrong, and you are also right.
>
> They are totally two different issues of af_alg07, the test on 1CPU
> should be fixed with TCONF. But the fail with aarch64 is more like a
> hardware issue, Chunyu has a drafted patch to add init delay value for
> such a system.
>
> Can you try this on your aarm64 platform?
> -----------------------------
> fzsync can't get a random delay range on hpe-moonshot systems, so run with
> delay=0 during all the tests. This is probably the hardware issue such as
> cache line design so can't get a stable state during the execution of the
> critical
> section. Provide an experience delay value on hpe-moonshot to make it hit
> the race window immediately without exceeding samples.
>
> ---
> testcases/kernel/crypto/af_alg07.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/crypto/af_alg07.c
> b/testcases/kernel/crypto/af_alg07.c
> index 6ad86f4f3..24f5b8088 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/crypto/af_alg07.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/crypto/af_alg07.c
> @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ static void setup(void)
> fd = SAFE_OPEN("tmpfile", O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0644);
>
> tst_fzsync_pair_init(&fzsync_pair);
> + fzsync_pair.delay_bias = 700;
I hope there is some way to set this dynamically. Similar to
CVE-2016-7117.
If we know that we should get some particular error we could modify the
bias until the error happens.
> }
>
> static void *thread_run(void *arg)
> --
> 2.19.1
--
Thank you,
Richard.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-30 9:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-25 10:16 [LTP] [PATCH] fzsync: skip test when avaliable CPUs less than 2 Li Wang
2020-11-25 11:22 ` Richard Palethorpe
2020-11-25 11:54 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-11-25 11:57 ` Martin Doucha
2020-11-25 11:56 ` Martin Doucha
2020-11-25 12:50 ` Li Wang
2020-11-25 13:13 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-11-25 13:23 ` Richard Palethorpe
2020-11-30 7:53 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-11-30 8:14 ` Li Wang
2020-11-30 8:39 ` Joerg Vehlow
2020-11-30 9:03 ` Li Wang
2020-11-30 9:01 ` Richard Palethorpe [this message]
2020-11-30 14:16 ` Martin Doucha
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=87wny3md61.fsf@suse.de \
--to=rpalethorpe@suse.de \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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