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: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 14:59:44 +0000
From: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>,
        Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
Cc: kernel@...labora.com, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: iommu: add config needed for iommufd_fail_nth

On 27/03/2024 11:49, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 03:14:25PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> On 3/26/24 8:03 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 06:09:34PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>>> Even after applying this config patch and following snippet (which doesn't
>>>> terminate the program if mmap doesn't allocate exactly as the hint), I'm
>>>> finding failed tests.
>>>>
>>>> @@ -1746,7 +1748,7 @@ FIXTURE_SETUP(iommufd_dirty_tracking)
>>>>         assert((uintptr_t)self->buffer % HUGEPAGE_SIZE == 0);
>>>>         vrc = mmap(self->buffer, variant->buffer_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
>>>>                    mmap_flags, -1, 0);
>>>> -       assert(vrc == self->buffer);
>>>> +       assert(vrc == self->buffer);// ???
>>>>
>>>> On x86:
>>>> # Totals: pass:176 fail:4 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>>>> On ARM64:
>>>> # Totals: pass:166 fail:14 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>>>>
>>>> The log files are attached.
>>>
>>> You probably don't have enough transparent huge pages available to the process
>>>
>>>       echo 1024 > /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages
>> After making huge pages available, the iommufd test always passed on x86.
>> But there are still failures on arm64. I'm looking into the failures.
> 
> Oh that is really strange. Joao? Nicolin?
> 
Definitely strange, I'll have a look.

So it set the expected number of dirty bits as that assert doesn't fail, but it
is failing when we check that even bits are set but not odd ones. Like it's
hasn't set those bits.

For mock tests there should be no difference between x86 and ARM assuming the
typical 4K page-size. Maybe this is 64k base pages in ARM? That's the only thing
that I can think of that affected mock domain.

Muhammad, could you paste your kconfig?

>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap
>> not ok 139 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
>> not ok 140 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap
>> not ok 144 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
>> not ok 145 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap
>> not ok 149 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
>> not ok 150 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap
>> not ok 159 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
>> not ok 160 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap
>> not ok 164 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
>> not ok 165 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap
>> not ok 169 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap
> 
>> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
>> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
>> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
>> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
>> not ok 170 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> 


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ