On 15/02/2022 16.25, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 2/15/22 12:48 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
Commit 2c212e1baedc ("KVM: s390: Return error on SIDA memop on normal guest") fixed the behavior of the SIDA memops for normal guests. It would be nice to have a way to test whether the current kernel has the fix applied or not. Thus add a check to the KVM selftests for these two memops.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth thuth@redhat.com
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c index 9f49ead380ab..d19c3ffdea3f 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c @@ -160,6 +160,21 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) run->psw_mask &= ~(3UL << (63 - 17)); /* Disable AR mode */ vcpu_run(vm, VCPU_ID); /* Run to sync new state */ + /* Check that the SIDA calls are rejected for non-protected guests */ + ksmo.gaddr = 0; + ksmo.flags = 0; + ksmo.size = 8; + ksmo.op = KVM_S390_MEMOP_SIDA_READ; + ksmo.buf = (uintptr_t)mem1; + ksmo.sida_offset = 0x1c0; + rv = _vcpu_ioctl(vm, VCPU_ID, KVM_S390_MEM_OP, &ksmo); + TEST_ASSERT(rv == -1 && errno == EINVAL, + "ioctl does not reject SIDA_READ in non-protected mode");
Printing what passed would be a good addition to understand the tests that get run and expected to pass.
Yes, I agree ... I'll add that for a follow-up patch to my TODO list.
+ ksmo.op = KVM_S390_MEMOP_SIDA_WRITE; + rv = _vcpu_ioctl(vm, VCPU_ID, KVM_S390_MEM_OP, &ksmo); + TEST_ASSERT(rv == -1 && errno == EINVAL, + "ioctl does not reject SIDA_WRITE in non-protected mode");
Same here.
kvm_vm_free(vm); return 0;
Something to consider in a follow-on patch and future changes to these tests.
Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
Thanks!
Thomas