| 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: <20211013174604.747276-20-irogers@google.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 10:46:01 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
"Paul A . Clarke" <pc@...ibm.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>,
David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc: eranian@...gle.com, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 19/22] perf test: BP tests, remove is_supported use
Migrate the is_supported functionality to returning TEST_SKIP.
Motivation is kunit has no is_supported function.
Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
---
tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c | 45 +++++++++++----------------
tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c | 43 ++++---------------------
tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c | 16 ++++------
tools/perf/tests/tests.h | 21 ++++++++++++-
4 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c
index e4f7b635ffef..d1ebb5561e5b 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c
@@ -19,6 +19,19 @@
#include "../perf-sys.h"
#include "cloexec.h"
+/*
+ * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction breakpoints using the
+ * perf_event interface.
+ *
+ * Just disable the test for these architectures until these issues are
+ * resolved.
+ */
+#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__)
+#define BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED 0
+#else
+#define BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED 1
+#endif
+
static volatile long the_var;
static noinline int test_function(void)
@@ -180,6 +193,11 @@ static int test__bp_accounting(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subte
int bp_cnt = detect_cnt(true);
int share = detect_share(wp_cnt, bp_cnt);
+ if (!BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED) {
+ pr_debug("Test not supported on this architecture");
+ return TEST_SKIP;
+ }
+
pr_debug("watchpoints count %d, breakpoints count %d, has_ioctl %d, share %d\n",
wp_cnt, bp_cnt, has_ioctl, share);
@@ -189,29 +207,4 @@ static int test__bp_accounting(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subte
return bp_accounting(wp_cnt, share);
}
-static bool test__bp_account_is_supported(void)
-{
- /*
- * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction
- * breakpoints using the perf_event interface.
- *
- * Just disable the test for these architectures until these
- * issues are resolved.
- */
-#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__)
- return false;
-#else
- return true;
-#endif
-}
-
-static struct test_case bp_accounting_tests[] = {
- TEST_CASE("Breakpoint accounting", bp_accounting),
- { .name = NULL, }
-};
-
-struct test_suite suite__bp_accounting = {
- .desc = "Breakpoint accounting",
- .test_cases = bp_accounting_tests,
- .is_supported = test__bp_account_is_supported,
-};
+DEFINE_SUITE("Breakpoint accounting", bp_accounting);
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
index 1676e3a11906..1f2908f02389 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
@@ -166,6 +166,11 @@ static int test__bp_signal(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subtest _
struct sigaction sa;
long long count1, count2, count3;
+ if (!BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED) {
+ pr_debug("Test not supported on this architecture");
+ return TEST_SKIP;
+ }
+
/* setup SIGIO signal handler */
memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(struct sigaction));
sa.sa_sigaction = (void *) sig_handler;
@@ -285,40 +290,4 @@ static int test__bp_signal(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subtest _
TEST_OK : TEST_FAIL;
}
-bool test__bp_signal_is_supported(void)
-{
- /*
- * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction
- * breakpoints using the perf_event interface.
- *
- * ARM requires explicit rounding down of the instruction
- * pointer in Thumb mode, and then requires the single-step
- * to be handled explicitly in the overflow handler to avoid
- * stepping into the SIGIO handler and getting stuck on the
- * breakpointed instruction.
- *
- * Since arm64 has the same issue with arm for the single-step
- * handling, this case also gets stuck on the breakpointed
- * instruction.
- *
- * Just disable the test for these architectures until these
- * issues are resolved.
- */
-#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) || defined(__arm__) || \
- defined(__aarch64__)
- return false;
-#else
- return true;
-#endif
-}
-
-static struct test_case bp_signal_tests[] = {
- TEST_CASE("Breakpoint overflow signal handler", bp_signal),
- { .name = NULL, }
-};
-
-struct test_suite suite__bp_signal = {
- .desc = "Breakpoint overflow signal handler",
- .test_cases = bp_signal_tests,
- .is_supported = test__bp_signal_is_supported,
-};
+DEFINE_SUITE("Breakpoint overflow signal handler", bp_signal);
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c
index bc1f13851750..4e897c2cf26b 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c
@@ -66,6 +66,11 @@ static int test__bp_signal_overflow(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int
long long count;
int fd, i, fails = 0;
+ if (!BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED) {
+ pr_debug("Test not supported on this architecture");
+ return TEST_SKIP;
+ }
+
/* setup SIGIO signal handler */
memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(struct sigaction));
sa.sa_sigaction = (void *) sig_handler;
@@ -134,13 +139,4 @@ static int test__bp_signal_overflow(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int
return fails ? TEST_FAIL : TEST_OK;
}
-static struct test_case bp_signal_overflow_tests[] = {
- TEST_CASE("Breakpoint overflow sampling", bp_signal_overflow),
- { .name = NULL, }
-};
-
-struct test_suite suite__bp_signal_overflow = {
- .desc = "Breakpoint overflow sampling",
- .test_cases = bp_signal_overflow_tests,
- .is_supported = test__bp_signal_is_supported,
-};
+DEFINE_SUITE("Breakpoint overflow sampling", bp_signal_overflow);
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/tests.h b/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
index cae33c375d55..958f94dcc94c 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
@@ -151,7 +151,26 @@ DECLARE_SUITE(expand_cgroup_events);
DECLARE_SUITE(perf_time_to_tsc);
DECLARE_SUITE(dlfilter);
-bool test__bp_signal_is_supported(void);
+/*
+ * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction breakpoints using the
+ * perf_event interface.
+ *
+ * ARM requires explicit rounding down of the instruction pointer in Thumb mode,
+ * and then requires the single-step to be handled explicitly in the overflow
+ * handler to avoid stepping into the SIGIO handler and getting stuck on the
+ * breakpointed instruction.
+ *
+ * Since arm64 has the same issue with arm for the single-step handling, this
+ * case also gets stuck on the breakpointed instruction.
+ *
+ * Just disable the test for these architectures until these issues are
+ * resolved.
+ */
+#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) || defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__)
+#define BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED 0
+#else
+#define BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED 1
+#endif
#ifdef HAVE_DWARF_UNWIND_SUPPORT
struct thread;
--
2.33.0.882.g93a45727a2-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists