On 15/02/2022 16.25, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 2/15/22 12:48 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
Commit 2c212e1baedc ("KVM: s390: Return error on SIDA memop on normal
guest") fixed the behavior of the SIDA memops for normal guests. It
would be nice to have a way to test whether the current kernel has
the fix applied or not. Thus add a check to the KVM selftests for
these two memops.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c
b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c
index 9f49ead380ab..d19c3ffdea3f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c
@@ -160,6 +160,21 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
run->psw_mask &= ~(3UL << (63 - 17)); /* Disable AR mode */
vcpu_run(vm, VCPU_ID); /* Run to sync new state */
+ /* Check that the SIDA calls are rejected for non-protected guests */
+ ksmo.gaddr = 0;
+ ksmo.flags = 0;
+ ksmo.size = 8;
+ ksmo.op = KVM_S390_MEMOP_SIDA_READ;
+ ksmo.buf = (uintptr_t)mem1;
+ ksmo.sida_offset = 0x1c0;
+ rv = _vcpu_ioctl(vm, VCPU_ID, KVM_S390_MEM_OP, &ksmo);
+ TEST_ASSERT(rv == -1 && errno == EINVAL,
+ "ioctl does not reject SIDA_READ in non-protected mode");
Printing what passed would be a good addition to understand the tests that
get run and expected to pass.
Yes, I agree ... I'll add that for a follow-up patch to my TODO list.
+ ksmo.op = KVM_S390_MEMOP_SIDA_WRITE;
+ rv = _vcpu_ioctl(vm, VCPU_ID, KVM_S390_MEM_OP, &ksmo);
+ TEST_ASSERT(rv == -1 && errno == EINVAL,
+ "ioctl does not reject SIDA_WRITE in non-protected mode");
+
Same here.
kvm_vm_free(vm);
return 0;
Something to consider in a follow-on patch and future changes to these tests.
Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks!
Thomas
