[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230814235111.GE2257301@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:51:11 -0700
From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>
To: Jinrong Liang <ljr.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>,
Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, isaku.yamahata@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] KVM: selftests: Add test cases for unsupported
PMU event filter input values
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 05:09:43PM +0800,
Jinrong Liang <ljr.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> From: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>
>
> Add test cases to verify the handling of unsupported input values for the
> PMU event filter. The tests cover unsupported "action" values, unsupported
> "flags" values, and unsupported "nevents" values. All these cases should
> return an error, as they are currently not supported by the filter.
> Furthermore, the tests also cover the case where setting non-existent
> fixed counters in the fixed bitmap does not fail.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>
> ---
> .../kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c
> index 94f5a89aac40..8b8bfee11016 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@
> #define MAX_FILTER_EVENTS 300
> #define MAX_TEST_EVENTS 10
>
> +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION (KVM_PMU_EVENT_DENY + 1)
> +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS (KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAGS_VALID_MASK << 1)
> +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS (MAX_FILTER_EVENTS + 1)
> +
> /*
> * This is how the event selector and unit mask are stored in an AMD
> * core performance event-select register. Intel's format is similar,
> @@ -760,6 +764,8 @@ static int set_pmu_single_event_filter(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint64_t event,
>
> static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> + uint8_t nr_fixed_counters = kvm_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_NR_FIXED_COUNTERS);
> + struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter f;
> uint64_t e = ~0ul;
> int r;
>
> @@ -780,6 +786,26 @@ static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS,
> KVM_PMU_EVENT_ALLOW);
> TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Valid PMU Event Filter is failing");
> +
> + f = base_event_filter;
> + f.action = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION;
> + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f);
> + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid action is expected to fail");
> +
> + f = base_event_filter;
> + f.flags = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS;
> + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f);
> + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid flags is expected to fail");
> +
> + f = base_event_filter;
> + f.nevents = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS;
> + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f);
> + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Exceeding the max number of filter events should fail");
> +
> + f = base_event_filter;
> + f.fixed_counter_bitmap = ~GENMASK_ULL(nr_fixed_counters, 0);
> + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f);
> + TEST_ASSERT(!r, "Masking non-existent fixed counters should be allowed");
> }
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> --
> 2.39.3
>
Reviewed-by: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
--
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists