lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 19/19] KVM: selftests: Add test for KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION
From
Date


On 17.12.19 21:40, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Add a KVM selftest to test moving the base gfn of a userspace memory
> region. The test is primarily targeted at x86 to verify its memslot
> metadata is correctly updated, but also provides basic functionality
> coverage on other architectures.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore | 1 +
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 3 +
> .../testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h | 1 +
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c | 30 ++++
> .../selftests/kvm/set_memory_region_test.c | 142 ++++++++++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 177 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/set_memory_region_test.c
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore
> index 30072c3f52fb..6f60ceb81440 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore
> @@ -17,3 +17,4 @@
> /clear_dirty_log_test
> /dirty_log_test
> /kvm_create_max_vcpus
> +/set_memory_region_test
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> index 3138a916574a..01c79e02c5b7 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> @@ -29,15 +29,18 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/xss_msr_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += clear_dirty_log_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += dirty_log_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_create_max_vcpus
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += set_memory_region_test
>
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += clear_dirty_log_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += dirty_log_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += kvm_create_max_vcpus
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += set_memory_region_test
>
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x = s390x/memop
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += s390x/sync_regs_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += dirty_log_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += kvm_create_max_vcpus
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += set_memory_region_test
>
> TEST_GEN_PROGS += $(TEST_GEN_PROGS_$(UNAME_M))
> LIBKVM += $(LIBKVM_$(UNAME_M))
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h
> index 29cccaf96baf..15d3b8690ffb 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h
> @@ -100,6 +100,7 @@ int _vcpu_ioctl(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid, unsigned long ioctl,
> void *arg);
> void vm_ioctl(struct kvm_vm *vm, unsigned long ioctl, void *arg);
> void vm_mem_region_set_flags(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t slot, uint32_t flags);
> +void vm_mem_region_move(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t slot, uint64_t new_gpa);
> void vm_vcpu_add(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid);
> vm_vaddr_t vm_vaddr_alloc(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, vm_vaddr_t vaddr_min,
> uint32_t data_memslot, uint32_t pgd_memslot);
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
> index 41cf45416060..464a75ce9843 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
> @@ -756,6 +756,36 @@ void vm_mem_region_set_flags(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t slot, uint32_t flags)
> ret, errno, slot, flags);
> }
>
> +/*
> + * VM Memory Region Move
> + *
> + * Input Args:
> + * vm - Virtual Machine
> + * slot - Slot of the memory region to move
> + * flags - Starting guest physical address
> + *
> + * Output Args: None
> + *
> + * Return: None
> + *
> + * Change the gpa of a memory region.
> + */
> +void vm_mem_region_move(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t slot, uint64_t new_gpa)
> +{
> + struct userspace_mem_region *region;
> + int ret;
> +
> + region = memslot2region(vm, slot);
> +
> + region->region.guest_phys_addr = new_gpa;
> +
> + ret = ioctl(vm->fd, KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION, &region->region);
> +
> + TEST_ASSERT(!ret, "KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION failed\n"
> + "ret: %i errno: %i slot: %u flags: 0x%x",
> + ret, errno, slot, new_gpa);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * VCPU mmap Size
> *
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/set_memory_region_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/set_memory_region_test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..c9603b95ccf7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/set_memory_region_test.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +#define _GNU_SOURCE /* for program_invocation_short_name */
> +#include <fcntl.h>
> +#include <pthread.h>
> +#include <sched.h>
> +#include <signal.h>
> +#include <stdio.h>
> +#include <stdlib.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +#include <sys/ioctl.h>
> +
> +#include <linux/compiler.h>
> +
> +#include <test_util.h>
> +#include <kvm_util.h>
> +#include <processor.h>
> +
> +#define VCPU_ID 0
> +
> +/*
> + * Somewhat arbitrary location and slot, intended to not overlap anything. The
> + * location and size are specifically 2mb sized/aligned so that the initial
> + * region corresponds to exactly one large page (on x86 and arm64).
> + */
> +#define MEM_REGION_GPA 0xc0000000
> +#define MEM_REGION_SIZE 0x200000
> +#define MEM_REGION_SLOT 10
> +
> +static void guest_code(void)
> +{
> + uint64_t val;
> +
> + do {
> + val = READ_ONCE(*((uint64_t *)MEM_REGION_GPA));
> + } while (!val);
> +
> + if (val != 1)
> + ucall(UCALL_ABORT, 1, val);
> +
> + GUEST_DONE();
> +}
> +
> +static void *vcpu_worker(void *data)
> +{
> + struct kvm_vm *vm = data;
> + struct kvm_run *run;
> + struct ucall uc;
> + uint64_t cmd;
> +
> + /*
> + * Loop until the guest is done. Re-enter the guest on all MMIO exits,
> + * which will occur if the guest attempts to access a memslot while it
> + * is being moved.
> + */
> + run = vcpu_state(vm, VCPU_ID);
> + do {
> + vcpu_run(vm, VCPU_ID);
> + } while (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_MMIO);
> +
> + TEST_ASSERT(run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_IO,
> + "Unexpected exit reason = %d", run->exit_reason);


This will also not work for s390. Maybe just make this test x86 specific for now?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-18 12:40    [W:0.173 / U:0.284 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site