linux-kernel - [PATCH 3/3] kselftest/arm64: Validate that changing one VL type does not affect another

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 13 Jul 2023 21:06:06 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc:     David Spickett <David.Spickett@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] kselftest/arm64: Validate that changing one VL type
 does not affect another

On a system with both SVE and SME when we change one of the VLs this should
not result in a change in the other VL. Add a check that this is in fact
the case to vec-syscfg.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c
index 58ea4bde5be7..5f648b97a06f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/vec-syscfg.c
@@ -554,7 +554,8 @@ static void prctl_set_onexec(struct vec_data *data)
 /* For each VQ verify that setting via prctl() does the right thing */
 static void prctl_set_all_vqs(struct vec_data *data)
 {
-	int ret, vq, vl, new_vl;
+	int ret, vq, vl, new_vl, i;
+	int orig_vls[ARRAY_SIZE(vec_data)];
 	int errors = 0;
 
 	if (!data->min_vl || !data->max_vl) {
@@ -563,6 +564,9 @@ static void prctl_set_all_vqs(struct vec_data *data)
 		return;
 	}
 
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(vec_data); i++)
+		orig_vls[i] = vec_data[i].rdvl();
+
 	for (vq = SVE_VQ_MIN; vq <= SVE_VQ_MAX; vq++) {
 		vl = sve_vl_from_vq(vq);
 
@@ -585,6 +589,22 @@ static void prctl_set_all_vqs(struct vec_data *data)
 			errors++;
 		}
 
+		/* Did any other VLs change? */
+		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(vec_data); i++) {
+			if (&vec_data[i] == data)
+				continue;
+
+			if (!(getauxval(vec_data[i].hwcap_type) & vec_data[i].hwcap))
+				continue;
+
+			if (vec_data[i].rdvl() != orig_vls[i]) {
+				ksft_print_msg("%s VL changed from %d to %d\n",
+					       vec_data[i].name, orig_vls[i],
+					       vec_data[i].rdvl());
+				errors++;
+			}
+		}
+
 		/* Was that the VL we asked for? */
 		if (new_vl == vl)
 			continue;

-- 
2.30.2