On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 7:57 AM Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > index 082855d94c72..b17874697d74 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore > > @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ > > /x86_64/hyperv_clock > > /x86_64/hyperv_cpuid > > /x86_64/hyperv_evmcs > > +/x86_64/hyperv_extended_hypercalls > > My personal preference would be to shorten the name to something like > "hyperv_ext_hcalls", doesn't seem to be ambiguos. No strong preference > though, feel free to keep the long version. > I will keep the long one, in v1 David was suggesting it will be easier for non Hyperv developers to read and understand. > > +/* Hyper-V defined paravirt features */ > > +#define X86_FEATURE_HYPERV_EXTENDED_HYPERCALLS KVM_X86_CPU_FEATURE(0x40000003, 0, EBX, 20) > > + > > I completely forgot about my other series where I've converted the whole > hyperv_features test to using KVM_X86_CPU_FEATURE(): > https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20221013095849.705943-6-vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > but your define reminded me of it, thanks! Hope the whole thing will get > queued soon. > Your patches are always one step ahead of me :D If your series doesn't show up in the KVM queue soon, I will rebase my patch series on top of your series > As for your change, I think it is better suited for > include/x86_64/hyperv.h instead of include/x86_64/processor.h anyway, > I'm trying to keep all Hyper-V related stuff separate as Hyper-V CPUID > leaves intersect with KVM's, e.g. 0x40000001. > Sounds good. > > /* > > * Same idea as X86_FEATURE_XXX, but X86_PROPERTY_XXX retrieves a multi-bit > > * value/property as opposed to a single-bit feature. Again, pack the info > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/hyperv_extended_hypercalls.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/hyperv_extended_hypercalls.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..13c1b03294a4 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/hyperv_extended_hypercalls.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > > +/* > > + * Test Hyper-V extended hypercall, HV_EXT_CALL_QUERY_CAPABILITIES (0x8001), > > + * exit to userspace and receive result in guest. > > + * > > + * Negative tests are present in hyperv_features.c > > + * > > + * Copyright 2022 Google LLC > > + * Author: Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > + */ > > + > > +#include "kvm_util.h" > > +#include "processor.h" > > +#include "hyperv.h" > > + > > +/* Any value is fine */ > > +#define EXT_CAPABILITIES 0xbull > > + > > +static void guest_code(vm_vaddr_t in_pg_gpa, vm_vaddr_t out_pg_gpa, > > + vm_vaddr_t out_pg_gva) > > +{ > > + uint64_t *output_gva; > > + > > + wrmsr(HV_X64_MSR_GUEST_OS_ID, HYPERV_LINUX_OS_ID); > > + wrmsr(HV_X64_MSR_HYPERCALL, in_pg_gpa); > > + > > + output_gva = (uint64_t *)out_pg_gva; > > + > > + hyperv_hypercall(HV_EXT_CALL_QUERY_CAPABILITIES, in_pg_gpa, out_pg_gpa); > > + > > + /* TLFS states output will be a uint64_t value */ > > + GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(*output_gva, EXT_CAPABILITIES); > > + > > + GUEST_DONE(); > > +} > > + > > +int main(void) > > +{ > > + vm_vaddr_t hcall_out_page; > > + vm_vaddr_t hcall_in_page; > > + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu; > > + struct kvm_run *run; > > + struct kvm_vm *vm; > > + uint64_t *outval; > > + struct ucall uc; > > + > > + /* Verify if extended hypercalls are supported */ > > + if (!kvm_cpuid_has(kvm_get_supported_hv_cpuid(), > > + X86_FEATURE_HYPERV_EXTENDED_HYPERCALLS)) { > > + print_skip("Extended calls not supported by the kernel"); > > + exit(KSFT_SKIP); > > + } > > + > > + vm = vm_create_with_one_vcpu(&vcpu, guest_code); > > + run = vcpu->run; > > + vcpu_enable_cap(vcpu, KVM_CAP_HYPERV_ENFORCE_CPUID, 1); > > Do we need this enforcement assuming we have no plans to add 'negative' > tests here (hyperv_features does it just fine)? vcpu_set_hv_cpuid() > enables everything anyway... > We do not. I will remove it. > > + vcpu_set_hv_cpuid(vcpu); > > + > > + /* Hypercall input */ > > + hcall_in_page = vm_vaddr_alloc_pages(vm, 1); > > + memset(addr_gva2hva(vm, hcall_in_page), 0x0, vm->page_size); > > + > > + /* Hypercall output */ > > + hcall_out_page = vm_vaddr_alloc_pages(vm, 1); > > + memset(addr_gva2hva(vm, hcall_out_page), 0x0, vm->page_size); > > + > > + vcpu_args_set(vcpu, 3, addr_gva2gpa(vm, hcall_in_page), > > + addr_gva2gpa(vm, hcall_out_page), hcall_out_page); > > + > > + vcpu_run(vcpu); > > + > > + ASSERT_EXIT_REASON(vcpu, KVM_EXIT_HYPERV); > > + > > + outval = addr_gpa2hva(vm, run->hyperv.u.hcall.params[1]); > > + *outval = EXT_CAPABILITIES; > > + run->hyperv.u.hcall.result = HV_STATUS_SUCCESS; > > + > > + vcpu_run(vcpu); > > + > > + ASSERT_EXIT_REASON(vcpu, KVM_EXIT_IO); > > + > > + switch (get_ucall(vcpu, &uc)) { > > + case UCALL_ABORT: > > + REPORT_GUEST_ASSERT_2(uc, "arg1 = %ld, arg2 = %ld"); > > + break; > > + case UCALL_DONE: > > + break; > > + default: > > + TEST_FAIL("Unhandled ucall: %ld", uc.cmd); > > + } > > + > > + kvm_vm_free(vm); > > + return 0; > > +} > > -- > Vitaly >
