Date:	Thu, 11 Dec 2014 17:56:24 +0800
From:	Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
To:	"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@...aro.org>
CC:	<masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>, <lizefan@...wei.com>,
	<linux@....linux.org.uk>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ARM: kprobes: Add test cases for stack consuming instructions

On 2014/12/10 21:18, Wang Nan wrote:
> On 2014/12/10 20:34, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
>> On Wed, 2014-12-10 at 16:23 +0800, Wang Nan wrote:
>>> Hi Tixy,
>>>
>>> I experienced another FAIL during test:
>>>
>>> [11567.220477] Miscellaneous instructions
>>> [11567.265397] ---------------------------------------------------------
>>> [11567.342626] mrs	r0, cpsr	@ e10f0000
>>> [11568.612656] FAIL: registers differ
>>> [11568.653414] FAIL: Test mrs	r0, cpsr
>>> [11568.695210] FAIL: Scenario 5
>>> [11568.729709] initial_regs:
>>> [11568.761083] r0  21522152 | r1  21522052 | r2  21522352 | r3  21522252
>>> [11568.838301] r4  21522552 | r5  21522452 | r6  21522752 | r7  21522652
>>> [11568.915526] r8  21522952 | r9  21522852 | r10 21522b52 | r11 21522a52
>>> [11568.992748] r12 21522d52 | sp  ed343cf0 | lr  21522f52 | pc  bf11f590
>>> [11569.069969] cpsr 58050013
>>> [11569.101336] expected_regs:
>>> [11569.133750] r0  58050013 | r1  21522052 | r2  21522352 | r3  21522252
>>> [11569.210975] r4  21522552 | r5  21522452 | r6  21522752 | r7  21522652
>>> [11569.288197] r8  21522952 | r9  21522852 | r10 21522b52 | r11 21522a52
>>> [11569.365417] r12 21522d52 | sp  ed343cf0 | lr  21522f52 | pc  bf11f594
>>> [11569.442634] cpsr 58050013
>>> [11569.474010] result_regs:
>>> [11569.504337] r0  58050113 | r1  21522052 | r2  21522352 | r3  21522252     <--- see R0 in this line
>>> [11569.581556] r4  21522552 | r5  21522452 | r6  21522752 | r7  21522652
>>> [11569.658776] r8  21522952 | r9  21522852 | r10 21522b52 | r11 21522a52
>>> [11569.736000] r12 21522d52 | sp  ed343cf0 | lr  21522f52 | pc  bf11f594
>>> [11569.813222] cpsr 58050013
>>> [11569.844593] mrspl	r7, cpsr	@ 510f7000
>>> [11571.842652] mrs	r14, cpsr	@ e10fe000
>>>
>>> The failure is raise when testing in "mrs r0, cpsr". The added bit is PSR_A_BIT, which
>>> should be ignored.
>>>
>>> So looks like this is also a problem in your test framework. If you don't have
>>> enough time, you can give me some hints to deal with it.
>>
>> The problem is that the A bit can change randomly when interrupts or
>> reschedules happen (I'm not sure it should, and it may be a bug). For
>> the purposes of this test code, we can't disable interrupts and
>> scheduling around all the iterations of a test case, because inserting
>> and removing probes requires them to be enabled. So we need a method of
>> ignoring bits in cpsr, how about the following patch...
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> From: Jon Medhurst <tixy@...aro.org>
>> Subject: [PATCH] ARM: kprobes: Fix unreliable MRS instruction tests
>>
>> For the instruction 'mrs Rn, cpsr' the resulting value of Rn can vary due to
>> external factors we can't control. So get the test code to mask out these
>> indeterminate bits.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jon Medhurst <tixy@...aro.org>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-arm.c   |  6 +++---
>>  arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.c  | 19 ++++++++++---------
>>  arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.h  | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>  arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-thumb.c |  4 ++--
>>  4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-arm.c b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-arm.c
>> index 9b3b1b4..e72b07e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-arm.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-arm.c
>> @@ -204,9 +204,9 @@ void kprobe_arm_test_cases(void)
>>  #endif
>>  	TEST_GROUP("Miscellaneous instructions")
>>  
>> -	TEST("mrs	r0, cpsr")
>> -	TEST("mrspl	r7, cpsr")
>> -	TEST("mrs	r14, cpsr")
>> +	TEST_RMASKED("mrs	r",0,~PSR_IGNORE_BITS,", cpsr")
>> +	TEST_RMASKED("mrspl	r",7,~PSR_IGNORE_BITS,", cpsr")
>> +	TEST_RMASKED("mrs	r",14,~PSR_IGNORE_BITS,", cpsr")
>>  	TEST_UNSUPPORTED(__inst_arm(0xe10ff000) "	@ mrs r15, cpsr")
>>  	TEST_UNSUPPORTED("mrs	r0, spsr")
>>  	TEST_UNSUPPORTED("mrs	lr, spsr")
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.c b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.c
>> index 7c5ddd5..e495127 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.c
>> @@ -1056,15 +1056,6 @@ static int test_case_run_count;
>>  static bool test_case_is_thumb;
>>  static int test_instance;
>>  
>> -/*
>> - * We ignore the state of the imprecise abort disable flag (CPSR.A) because this
>> - * can change randomly as the kernel doesn't take care to preserve or initialise
>> - * this across context switches. Also, with Security Extentions, the flag may
>> - * not be under control of the kernel; for this reason we ignore the state of
>> - * the FIQ disable flag CPSR.F as well.
>> - */
>> -#define PSR_IGNORE_BITS (PSR_A_BIT | PSR_F_BIT)
>> -
>>  static unsigned long test_check_cc(int cc, unsigned long cpsr)
>>  {
>>  	int ret = arm_check_condition(cc << 28, cpsr);
>> @@ -1271,11 +1262,21 @@ test_case_pre_handler(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs)
>>  static int __kprobes
>>  test_after_pre_handler(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs)
>>  {
>> +	struct test_arg *args;
>> +
>>  	if (container_of(p, struct test_probe, kprobe)->hit == test_instance)
>>  		return 0; /* Already run for this test instance */
>>  
>>  	result_regs = *regs;
>> +
>> +	/* Mask out results which are indeterminate */
>>  	result_regs.ARM_cpsr &= ~PSR_IGNORE_BITS;
>> +	for (args = current_args; args[0].type != ARG_TYPE_END; ++args)
>> +		if (args[0].type == ARG_TYPE_REG_MASKED) {
>> +			struct test_arg_regptr *arg =
>> +				(struct test_arg_regptr *)args;
>> +			result_regs.uregs[arg->reg] &= arg->val;
>> +		}
>>  
>>  	/* Undo any changes done to SP by the test case */
>>  	regs->ARM_sp = (unsigned long)current_stack;
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.h b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.h
>> index 9991754..32f7aa7 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-core.h
>> @@ -45,10 +45,11 @@ extern int kprobe_test_cc_position;
>>   *
>>   */
>>  
>> -#define	ARG_TYPE_END	0
>> -#define	ARG_TYPE_REG	1
>> -#define	ARG_TYPE_PTR	2
>> -#define	ARG_TYPE_MEM	3
>> +#define	ARG_TYPE_END		0
>> +#define	ARG_TYPE_REG		1
>> +#define	ARG_TYPE_PTR		2
>> +#define	ARG_TYPE_MEM		3
>> +#define	ARG_TYPE_REG_MASKED	4
>>  
>>  #define ARG_FLAG_UNSUPPORTED	0x01
>>  #define ARG_FLAG_SUPPORTED	0x02
>> @@ -61,7 +62,7 @@ struct test_arg {
>>  };
>>  
>>  struct test_arg_regptr {
>> -	u8	type;		/* ARG_TYPE_REG or ARG_TYPE_PTR */
>> +	u8	type;		/* ARG_TYPE_REG or ARG_TYPE_PTR or ARG_TYPE_REG_MASKED */
>>  	u8	reg;
>>  	u8	_padding[2];
>>  	u32	val;
>> @@ -138,6 +139,12 @@ struct test_arg_end {
>>  	".short	0					\n\t"	\
>>  	".word	"#val"					\n\t"
>>  
>> +#define	TEST_ARG_REG_MASKED(reg, val)				\
>> +	".byte	"__stringify(ARG_TYPE_REG_MASKED)"	\n\t"	\
>> +	".byte	"#reg"					\n\t"	\
>> +	".short	0					\n\t"	\
>> +	".word	"#val"					\n\t"
>> +
>>  #define	TEST_ARG_END(flags)					\
>>  	".byte	"__stringify(ARG_TYPE_END)"		\n\t"	\
>>  	".byte	"TEST_ISA flags"			\n\t"	\
>> @@ -395,6 +402,22 @@ struct test_arg_end {
>>  	"	"codex"			\n\t"					\
>>  	TESTCASE_END
>>  
>> +#define TEST_RMASKED(code1, reg, mask, code2)		\
>> +	TESTCASE_START(code1 #reg code2)		\
>> +	TEST_ARG_REG_MASKED(reg, mask)			\
>> +	TEST_ARG_END("")				\
>> +	TEST_INSTRUCTION(code1 #reg code2)		\
>> +	TESTCASE_END
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * We ignore the state of the imprecise abort disable flag (CPSR.A) because this
>> + * can change randomly as the kernel doesn't take care to preserve or initialise
>> + * this across context switches. Also, with Security Extensions, the flag may
>> + * not be under control of the kernel; for this reason we ignore the state of
>> + * the FIQ disable flag CPSR.F as well.
>> + */
>> +#define PSR_IGNORE_BITS (PSR_A_BIT | PSR_F_BIT)
>> +
>>  
>>  /*
>>   * Macros for defining space directives spread over multiple lines.
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-thumb.c b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-thumb.c
>> index e8cf193..b683b45 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-thumb.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/test-thumb.c
>> @@ -778,8 +778,8 @@ CONDITION_INSTRUCTIONS(22,
>>  
>>  	TEST_UNSUPPORTED("subs	pc, lr, #4")
>>  
>> -	TEST("mrs	r0, cpsr")
>> -	TEST("mrs	r14, cpsr")
>> +	TEST_RMASKED("mrs	r",0,~PSR_IGNORE_BITS,", cpsr")
>> +	TEST_RMASKED("mrs	r",14,~PSR_IGNORE_BITS,", cpsr")
>>  	TEST_UNSUPPORTED(__inst_thumb32(0xf3ef8d00) "	@ mrs	sp, spsr")
>>  	TEST_UNSUPPORTED(__inst_thumb32(0xf3ef8f00) "	@ mrs	pc, spsr")
>>  	TEST_UNSUPPORTED("mrs	r0, spsr")
>>
> 
> Well, I'm just working on a patch which introducing a TEST_INTOFF and disable interrupts
> for "MRS" testcase. Do you think it is inappropriate? I'll use your patch test for a night
> in my hardware, and will let you know the result tomorrow.
> 
> Thank you!
> 

Hi Tixy,

I'd like to let you know that I have tested your v3 patch in an ARM cortex A15 board
for 8 hours and nothing bad happened. I'll post a v16 patch series to merge your patch.

Thank you!

> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists