linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: x86: skip the tests if prerequisites aren't fulfilled

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]

Message-ID: <9b30d5a7-1a23-4f48-b6c3-4908535a998b@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 14:51:44 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>,
 Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
 Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Weihong Zhang <weihong.zhang@...el.com>, angquan yu <angquan21@...il.com>
Cc: kernel@...labora.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: x86: skip the tests if prerequisites aren't
 fulfilled

On 3/14/24 05:44, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> Skip instead of failing when prerequisite conditions aren't fulfilled,
> such as invalid xstate values etc. This patch would make the tests show
> as skip when run by:
>    make -C tools/testing/selftests/ TARGETS=x86 run_tests
> 
>    ...
>    # timeout set to 45
>    # selftests: x86: amx_64
>    # # xstate cpuid: invalid tile data size/offset: 0/0
>    ok 42 selftests: x86: amx_64 # SKIP
>    # timeout set to 45
>    # selftests: x86: lam_64
>    # # Unsupported LAM feature!
>    ok 43 selftests: x86: lam_64 # SKIP
>    ...
> 
> Cc: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
> Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> - Use arch_prctl to check if amx is supported

This should be mentioned in the changelog  and also
show that there are bo backwards compatibility issues.

> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c | 27 ++++++++++-----------------
>   tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c |  2 +-
>   2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c
> index d884fd69dd510..95aad6d8849be 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c
> @@ -103,21 +103,6 @@ static void clearhandler(int sig)
>   
>   #define CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK	(1 << 26)
>   #define CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK	(1 << 27)
> -static inline void check_cpuid_xsave(void)
> -{
> -	uint32_t eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * CPUID.1:ECX.XSAVE[bit 26] enumerates general
> -	 * support for the XSAVE feature set, including
> -	 * XGETBV.
> -	 */
> -	__cpuid_count(1, 0, eax, ebx, ecx, edx);
> -	if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK))
> -		fatal_error("cpuid: no CPU xsave support");
> -	if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK))
> -		fatal_error("cpuid: no OS xsave support");
> -}
>   

Why doesn't the changelog mention the code removal?

thanks,
-- Shuah