| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20200331081632.ithcwuzjyjhiwphy@kamzik.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 10:16:32 +0200
From: Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>
To: Wainer dos Santos Moschetta <wainersm@...hat.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
david@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: kvm: Add mem_slot_test test
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 05:43:10PM -0300, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta wrote:
> This patch introduces the mem_slot_test test which checks
> an VM can have added memory slots up to the limit defined in
> KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS. Then attempt to add one more slot to
> verify it fails as expected.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wainer dos Santos Moschetta <wainersm@...hat.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore | 1 +
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 3 +
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 96 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore
> index 30072c3f52fb..b1b94d50f6a2 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
> +/mem_slot_test
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> index d91c53b726e6..070133349403 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> @@ -30,16 +30,19 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/svm_vmcall_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 += mem_slot_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 += mem_slot_test
>
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x = s390x/memop
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += s390x/sync_regs_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += s390x/resets
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += dirty_log_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += kvm_create_max_vcpus
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += mem_slot_test
>
> TEST_GEN_PROGS += $(TEST_GEN_PROGS_$(UNAME_M))
> LIBKVM += $(LIBKVM_$(UNAME_M))
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..75d2bbd71642
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +/*
> + * mem_slot_test
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2020, Red Hat, Inc.
> + *
> + * Test it can be added memory slots up to KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS, then any
> + * tentative to add further slots should fail.
> + */
> +#define _GNU_SOURCE /* for program_invocation_short_name */
> +#include <linux/kvm.h>
> +#include <sys/mman.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +
> +#include "test_util.h"
> +#include "kvm_util.h"
> +
> +/* Memory region flags */
> +#define MEM_REG_FLAGS KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES
> +
> +/* Guest VM mode */
> +#define GUEST_VM_MODE VM_MODE_DEFAULT
I'm not sure what the value of the two defines above are. I'd prefer we
avoid unnecessary renaming. Also, do we need KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES for
this test?
> +
> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> +{
> + struct kvm_vm *vm;
> + /* Maximum allowed number of memory slots */
> + uint32_t max_mem_slots;
> + /* Slot number */
> + uint32_t slot;
> + /* Number of pages in a memory region */
> + uint64_t mem_reg_npages;
> + /* Memory region size */
> + uint64_t mem_reg_size;
> + /* Guest physical memory guest_address */
> + uint64_t guest_addr;
> + /* VM page size */
> + uint64_t vm_page_size;
nit: IMO, the variable names above are descriptive enough to drop the
comments.
> + int ret;
> +
> + max_mem_slots = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS);
> + TEST_ASSERT(max_mem_slots > 0,
> + "KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS should be greater than 0");
> + DEBUG("Allowed number of memory slots: %i\n", max_mem_slots);
DEBUG() no longer exists in kvm/queue. This should now be pr_debug().
> +
> + vm = vm_create(GUEST_VM_MODE, 0, O_RDWR);
> +
> + /* Determine the minimal number of pages as possible per region. */
> + vm_page_size = vm_get_page_size(vm);
> +#ifdef __s390x__
> + mem_reg_size = 0x100000;
> +#else
> + uint64_t host_page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
> +
> + mem_reg_size = (host_page_size > vm_page_size) ? host_page_size :
> + vm_page_size;
> +#endif
> + mem_reg_npages = mem_reg_size / vm_page_size;
On kvm/queue the above 11 lines can now all be done with
mem_reg_size = SOME_ARBITRARY_MEM_REG_SIZE;
mem_reg_npages = vm_calc_num_guest_pages(VM_MODE_DEFAULT, mem_reg_size);
> + guest_addr = 0x0;
> +
> + /* Check it can be added memory slots up to the maximum allowed */
> + DEBUG("Adding slots 0..%i, each memory region with %ldK size\n",
> + (max_mem_slots - 1), mem_reg_size >> 10);
> + for (slot = 0; slot < max_mem_slots; slot++) {
> + vm_userspace_mem_region_add(vm, VM_MEM_SRC_ANONYMOUS,
> + guest_addr, slot, mem_reg_npages,
> + MEM_REG_FLAGS);
> + guest_addr += mem_reg_size;
> + }
> +
> + /* Check it cannot be added memory slots beyond the limit */
> + guest_addr += mem_reg_size;
nit: shouldn't be necessary. We already incremented guest_addr on the
last loop.
> + void *mem = mmap(NULL, mem_reg_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
> + TEST_ASSERT(mem != NULL, "Failed to mmap() host");
> +
> + struct kvm_userspace_memory_region kvm_region = {
> + .slot = slot,
> + .flags = MEM_REG_FLAGS,
> + .guest_phys_addr = guest_addr,
> + .memory_size = mem_reg_size,
> + .userspace_addr = (uint64_t) mem,
> + };
> +
> + ret = ioctl(vm_get_fd(vm), KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION, &kvm_region);
> + TEST_ASSERT(ret == -1, "Adding one more memory slot should fail");
Shouldn't we also check that we get the correct errno?
> +
> + munmap(mem, mem_reg_size);
> + kvm_vm_free(vm);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> --
> 2.17.2
>
Thanks,
drew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists