On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 02:24:32AM +0000, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> Extend the read-only memslot tests in page_fault_test to test read-only PT
> (Page table) memslots. Note that this was not allowed before commit "KVM:
> arm64: Fix handling of S1PTW S2 fault on RO memslots" as all S1PTW faults
> were treated as writes which resulted in an (unrecoverable) exception
> inside the guest.
Do we need an additional test that the guest gets nuked if TCR_EL1.HA =
0b1 and AF is clear in one of the stage-1 PTEs?
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../selftests/kvm/aarch64/page_fault_test.c | 14 +++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/page_fault_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/page_fault_test.c
> index 2e2178a7d0d8..2f81d68e876c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/page_fault_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/page_fault_test.c
> @@ -831,6 +831,7 @@ static void help(char *name)
> { \
> .name = SCAT3(ro_memslot, _access, _with_af), \
Does the '_with_af' actually belong here? The macro doesn't take such a
parameter. AFAICT the access flag is already set in all S1 PTEs for this
case and TCR_EL1.HA = 0b0.
> .data_memslot_flags = KVM_MEM_READONLY, \
> + .pt_memslot_flags = KVM_MEM_READONLY, \
> .guest_prepare = { _PREPARE(_access) }, \
> .guest_test = _access, \
> .mmio_handler = _mmio_handler, \
--
Thanks,
Oliver
