| 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: <YuS8kTgCBtdGy9XL@bertie>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2022 00:07:29 -0500
From: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@...il.com>
To: shaoqin.huang@...el.com
Cc: rppt@...nel.org, Karolina Drobnik <karolinadrobnik@...il.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memblock test: Add test to memblock_add() 129th region
On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 01:00:47PM -0600, shaoqin.huang@...el.com wrote:
> From: Shaoqin Huang <shaoqin.huang@...el.com>
>
I tested this out, and everything is working well. I have a couple of
suggestions for improvements.
> Add 129th region into the memblock, and this will trigger the
> memblock_double_array() function, this needs valid memory regions. So
> using dummy_physical_memory_init() to allocate some valid memory, when
> memblock_double_array() choose a new memory region from memory.regions,
> it will always choose a valid memory region if we add all valid memory
> region, so the memblock_double_array() must success.
>
> Another thing should be done is to restore the memory.regions after
> memblock_double_array(), due to now the memory.regions is pointing to a
> memory region allocated by dummy_physical_memory_init(). And it will
> affect the subsequent tests if we don't restore the memory region. So
> Simply record the origin region, and restore it after the test.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shaoqin Huang <shaoqin.huang@...el.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c | 9 ++--
> tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h | 5 ++
> 3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c
> index 66f46f261e66..ded93f97d98e 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c
> @@ -326,6 +326,70 @@ static int memblock_add_twice_check(void)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int memblock_add_many_check(void)
> +{
> + int i;
> + void *base[INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1];
> + void *orig_region;
> + struct region r = {
> + .base = SZ_16K,
> + .size = MEM_SIZE,
> + };
> +
> + PREFIX_PUSH();
> +
> + reset_memblock_regions();
> + memblock_allow_resize();
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; i++) {
> + dummy_physical_memory_init();
> + append_memblock();
> + base[i] = memory_block.base;
> +
> + assert(memblock.memory.cnt == i + 1);
Maybe you could call the ASSERT_EQ() macro here instead of directly
calling assert. That way, if the test fails in verbose mode, it will print
out the test prefix. This applies to the other asserts as well.
> + assert(memblock.memory.total_size == (i + 1) * MEM_SIZE);
> + }
> +
> + orig_region = memblock.memory.regions;
> +
> + /* This adds the 129 memory_region, and makes it double array. */
> + dummy_physical_memory_init();
> + append_memblock();
> + base[i] = memory_block.base;
> +
> + assert(memblock.memory.cnt == INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1);
> + assert(memblock.memory.total_size == (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1) * MEM_SIZE);
> + assert(memblock.memory.max == INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2);
> +
> + /* The base is very small, so it should be insert to the first region. */
> + memblock_add(r.base, r.size);
> + assert(memblock.memory.regions[0].base == r.base);
> + assert(memblock.memory.regions[0].size == r.size);
> +
> + assert(memblock.memory.cnt == INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2);
> + assert(memblock.memory.total_size == (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2) * MEM_SIZE);
> + assert(memblock.memory.max == INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2);
> +
> + /* Free these allocated memory. */
> + for (i = 0; i < INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1; i++) {
> + memory_block.base = base[i];
> + dummy_physical_memory_cleanup();
> + }
> +
This could be moved to a function in common.c since it may be useful if
we write similar tests later. For example:
void dummy_physical_memory_many_cleanup(void *base[], int cnt)
{
for (int i = 0; i < cnt; i++) {
memory_block.base = base[i];
dummy_physical_memory_cleanup();
}
}
Since the other usages of memory_block in basic_api.c do not need to
modify it, you could then replace those usages with a call to a function
from common.c like:
void *get_memory_block_base(void)
{
return memory_block.base;
}
to avoid adding memory_block to common.h and changing to non-static in
common.c.
> + /*
> + * The current memory.regions is occupying a range of memory that
> + * allocated from dummy_physical_memory_init(). After free the memory,
> + * we must not use it. So restore the origin memory region to make sure
> + * the tests can run as normal and not affected by the double array.
> + */
> + memblock.memory.regions = orig_region;
> + memblock.memory.cnt = INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS;
> +
> + test_pass_pop();
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int memblock_add_checks(void)
> {
> prefix_reset();
> @@ -339,6 +403,7 @@ static int memblock_add_checks(void)
> memblock_add_overlap_bottom_check();
> memblock_add_within_check();
> memblock_add_twice_check();
> + memblock_add_many_check();
>
> prefix_pop();
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
> index e43b2676af81..4741e860123a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
> @@ -5,12 +5,10 @@
> #include <linux/memory_hotplug.h>
> #include <linux/build_bug.h>
>
> -#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS 128
> -#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_RESERVED_REGIONS INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS
> #define PREFIXES_MAX 15
> #define DELIM ": "
>
> -static struct test_memory memory_block;
> +struct test_memory memory_block;
> static const char __maybe_unused *prefixes[PREFIXES_MAX];
> static int __maybe_unused nr_prefixes;
>
> @@ -64,6 +62,11 @@ void setup_memblock(void)
> memblock_add((phys_addr_t)memory_block.base, MEM_SIZE);
> }
>
> +void append_memblock(void)
> +{
> + memblock_add((phys_addr_t)memory_block.base, MEM_SIZE);
> +}
> +
> void dummy_physical_memory_init(void)
> {
> memory_block.base = malloc(MEM_SIZE);
> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> index 3e7f23d341d7..8946a3b77f24 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
> #include <../selftests/kselftest.h>
>
> #define MEM_SIZE SZ_16K
> +#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS 128
> +#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_RESERVED_REGIONS INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS
>
> /**
> * ASSERT_EQ():
> @@ -65,9 +67,12 @@ struct region {
> phys_addr_t size;
> };
>
> +extern struct test_memory memory_block;
> +
> void reset_memblock_regions(void);
> void reset_memblock_attributes(void);
> void setup_memblock(void);
> +void append_memblock(void);
> void dummy_physical_memory_init(void);
> void dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(void);
> void parse_args(int argc, char **argv);
> --
> 2.30.2
>
Thanks,
Rebecca
Powered by blists - more mailing lists