The seccomp selftest goes to some length to build against older kernel
headers, viz. all the #ifdefs at the beginning of the file. 201766a20e30
("ptrace: add PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO request") introduces some additional
macros, but doesn't do the #ifdef dance. Let's add that dance here to
avoid:
gcc -Wl,-no-as-needed -Wall seccomp_bpf.c -lpthread -o seccomp_bpf
In file included from seccomp_bpf.c:51:
seccomp_bpf.c: In function ‘tracer_ptrace’:
seccomp_bpf.c:1787:20: error: ‘PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘PTRACE_EVENT_CLONE’?
EXPECT_EQ(entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../kselftest_harness.h:608:13: note: in definition of macro ‘__EXPECT’
__typeof__(_expected) __exp = (_expected); \
^~~~~~~~~
seccomp_bpf.c:1787:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘EXPECT_EQ’
EXPECT_EQ(entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY
^~~~~~~~~
seccomp_bpf.c:1787:20: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
EXPECT_EQ(entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../kselftest_harness.h:608:13: note: in definition of macro ‘__EXPECT’
__typeof__(_expected) __exp = (_expected); \
^~~~~~~~~
seccomp_bpf.c:1787:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘EXPECT_EQ’
EXPECT_EQ(entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY
^~~~~~~~~
seccomp_bpf.c:1788:6: error: ‘PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_EXIT’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT’?
: PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_EXIT, msg);
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../kselftest_harness.h:608:13: note: in definition of macro ‘__EXPECT’
__typeof__(_expected) __exp = (_expected); \
^~~~~~~~~
seccomp_bpf.c:1787:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘EXPECT_EQ’
EXPECT_EQ(entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY
^~~~~~~~~
make: *** [Makefile:12: seccomp_bpf] Error 1
Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho(a)tycho.ws>
Fixes: 201766a20e30 ("ptrace: add PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO request")
---
tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
index 6ef7f16c4cf5..7f8b5c8982e3 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
@@ -199,6 +199,11 @@ struct seccomp_notif_sizes {
};
#endif
+#ifndef PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY
+#define PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY 1
+#define PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_EXIT 2
+#endif
+
#ifndef seccomp
int seccomp(unsigned int op, unsigned int flags, void *args)
{
--
2.20.1
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini(a)redhat.com>
[ Upstream commit 54577e5018a8c0cb79c9a0fa118a55c68715d398 ]
state_test and smm_test are failing on older processors that do not
have xcr0. This is because on those processor KVM does provide
support for KVM_GET/SET_XSAVE (to avoid having to rely on the older
KVM_GET/SET_FPU) but not for KVM_GET/SET_XCRS.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini(a)redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org>
---
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86.c | 16 ++++++++++------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86.c
index a3122f1949a8e..4d35eba73dc97 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86.c
@@ -809,9 +809,11 @@ struct kvm_x86_state *vcpu_save_state(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid)
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_XSAVE, r: %i",
r);
- r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_GET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
- TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_XCRS, r: %i",
- r);
+ if (kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_XCRS)) {
+ r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_GET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
+ TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_XCRS, r: %i",
+ r);
+ }
r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_GET_SREGS, &state->sregs);
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_SREGS, r: %i",
@@ -858,9 +860,11 @@ void vcpu_load_state(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid, struct kvm_x86_state *s
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_XSAVE, r: %i",
r);
- r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_SET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
- TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_XCRS, r: %i",
- r);
+ if (kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_XCRS)) {
+ r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_SET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
+ TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_XCRS, r: %i",
+ r);
+ }
r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_SET_SREGS, &state->sregs);
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_SREGS, r: %i",
--
2.20.1
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini(a)redhat.com>
[ Upstream commit 54577e5018a8c0cb79c9a0fa118a55c68715d398 ]
state_test and smm_test are failing on older processors that do not
have xcr0. This is because on those processor KVM does provide
support for KVM_GET/SET_XSAVE (to avoid having to rely on the older
KVM_GET/SET_FPU) but not for KVM_GET/SET_XCRS.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini(a)redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org>
---
.../testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/processor.c | 16 ++++++++++------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/processor.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/processor.c
index d2ad85fb01ac0..5f1ba3da2dbd3 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/processor.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/processor.c
@@ -1059,9 +1059,11 @@ struct kvm_x86_state *vcpu_save_state(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid)
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_XSAVE, r: %i",
r);
- r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_GET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
- TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_XCRS, r: %i",
- r);
+ if (kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_XCRS)) {
+ r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_GET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
+ TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_XCRS, r: %i",
+ r);
+ }
r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_GET_SREGS, &state->sregs);
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_GET_SREGS, r: %i",
@@ -1102,9 +1104,11 @@ void vcpu_load_state(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid, struct kvm_x86_state *s
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_XSAVE, r: %i",
r);
- r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_SET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
- TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_XCRS, r: %i",
- r);
+ if (kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_XCRS)) {
+ r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_SET_XCRS, &state->xcrs);
+ TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_XCRS, r: %i",
+ r);
+ }
r = ioctl(vcpu->fd, KVM_SET_SREGS, &state->sregs);
TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Unexpected result from KVM_SET_SREGS, r: %i",
--
2.20.1