On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 01:25:31PM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> On 04/09/2019 12:47, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 12:29:21pm +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> this patchset aims to add the initial arch-specific arm64 support to
> >> kselftest starting with signals-related test-cases.
> >> A common internal test-case layout is proposed which then it is anyway
> >> wired-up to the toplevel kselftest Makefile, so that it should be possible
> >> at the end to run it on an arm64 target in the usual way with KSFT.
> >
> > BTW, it's helpful to state the base branch / commit as clearly as
> > possible near the top of the cover letter, say,
> >
> > --8<--
> >
> > This series is based on arm64/for-next/core [1]
> > commit 9ce1263033cd ("selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel")
> >
> > [1] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git for-next/core
> >
> > -->8--
> >
> > This is particularly important if you expect the maintainer to pick up
> > the patches.
> >
> > You don't need to reference a specific commit unless there's a
> > significant chance of conflicts if the wrong commit is used, but it can
> > help provide a clue as to why you're basing on this alternate branch.
> >
>
> Ok, thanks I'll do.
>
> >> ~/linux# make TARGETS=arm64 kselftest
> >>
> >> New KSFT arm64 testcases live inside tools/testing/selftests/arm64 grouped by
> >> family inside subdirectories: arm64/signal is the first family proposed with
> >> this series.
> >> This series converts also to this subdirectory scheme the pre-existing
> >> (already queued on arm64/for-next/core) KSFT arm64 tags tests, moving them
> >> into arm64/tags.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Cristian
> >>
> >>
> >> Notes:
> >> -----
> >> - further details in the included READMEs
> >>
> >> - more tests still to be written (current strategy is going through the related
> >> Kernel signal-handling code and write a test for each possible and sensible code-path)
> >> A few ideas for more TODO testcases:
> >> - fake_sigreturn_unmapped_sp: SP into unmapped addrs
> >> - fake_sigreturn_kernelspace_sp: SP into kernel addrs
> >> - fake_sigreturn_sve_bad_extra_context: SVE extra context badly formed
> >> - mangle_sve_invalid_extra_context: SVE extra_context invalid
> >>
> >> - SVE signal testcases and special handling will be part of an additional patch
> >> still to be released
> >
> > What's your approach to checking that the test failure paths work?
> >
> > We could either hack the kernel or the tests to provoke "fake" failures,
> > and I don't think it's necessary to test everything in this way,
> > providing we have confidence that the test strategy and framework works
> > in general.
> >
>
> So my approach to testing the tests itself has been as follows:
>
> - PASS path: instrumented Kernel itself to print the exact line where the SEGV
> is supposed to be called and manually check once for all (just redone now).
> Something like:
>
> # FAKE_SIGRETURN_MISALIGNED_SP :: Triggers a sigreturn with a misaligned sigframe
> Registered handlers for all signals.
> Detected MINSTKSIGSZ:9984
> Testcase initialized.
> uc context validated.
> GOOD CONTEXT grabbed from sig_copyctx handler
> Handled SIG_COPYCTX
> Calling sigreturn with fake sigframe sized:4688 at SP @FFFFCAAE5253
> [ 188.206911] Kernel SEGV @ 571 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> SIG_OK -- SP:0xFFFFCAAE5253 si_addr@:0xffffcaae5253 si_code:2 token@:0xffffcaae5253 offset:0
> ==>> completed. PASS(1)
>
>
> - FAIL path: tried at first the same approach (instrument to avoid the SEGV), but thinking that
> this could have led to general Kernel instability while processing bad sigframes,
> I instead instrumented tests and utils as follows:
>
> - mangle_ TESTS:
>
> + removed the "mangling" for each test, and observed test FAIL (NO SEGV)
>
> # MANGLE_PSTATE_INVALID_MODE_EL1h :: Mangling uc_mcontext INVALID MODE EL1h
> Registered handlers for all signals.
> Detected MINSTKSIGSZ:9984
> Testcase initialized.
> uc context validated.
> Handled SIG_TRIG
> ==>> completed. FAIL(0)
>
> + SSBS: being this a peculiar mangle_ test, where we check that SSBS is PRESERVED as it is
> on Kernel restoring sigframe (no expected SEGV), I used a kernel patched to NOT preserve
> the SSBS bit (so clearing it). Moreover I experimented with the various SSBS support levels
> (no_supp/SSBS_BIT/MRS+SSBS_BIT) and observed how test behaved related to the detected SSBS support
>
> + verify that an anomalous SEGV (no SEGV_ACCER) is detected (say a *(* int)0x00= inside handler)
>
> # MANGLE_PSTATE_INVALID_DAIF_BITS :: Mangling uc_mcontext with INVALID DAIF_BITS
> Registered handlers for all signals.
> Detected MINSTKSIGSZ:9984
> Testcase initialized.
> uc context validated.
> SIG_OK -- SP:0xFFFFFBE96DA0 si_addr@:(nil) si_code:1 token@:(nil) offset:0
> si_code != SEGV_ACCERR...test is probably broken! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> -- RX UNEXPECTED SIGNAL: 6
> ==>> completed. FAIL(0)
>
>
> - fake_sigreturn_ TESTS:
>
> + verify placing on the stack the good context grabbed from get_current_context() as it is
> (GOOD), execution flow is anomalously restored inside get_current_context() and such
> anomaly is spotted (without deadly loops)
>
> # FAKE_SIGRETURN_BAD_MAGIC :: Trigger a sigreturn with a sigframe with a bad magic
> Registered handlers for all signals.
> Detected MINSTKSIGSZ:9984
> Testcase initialized.
> uc context validated.
> GOOD CONTEXT grabbed from sig_copyctx handler
> Handled SIG_COPYCTX
> Calling sigreturn with fake sigframe sized:4688 at SP @FFFFCAC61F80
> Unexpected successful sigreturn detected: live_uc is stale ! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> ==>> completed. FAIL(0)
>
> + verify that an early SEGV is detected as anomalous (say a *(* int)0x00 before fake sigframe
> has been placed on the stack)
>
> # FAKE_SIGRETURN_BAD_MAGIC :: Trigger a sigreturn with a sigframe with a bad magic
> Registered handlers for all signals.
> Detected MINSTKSIGSZ:9984
> Testcase initialized.
> uc context validated.
> GOOD CONTEXT grabbed from sig_copyctx handler
> Handled SIG_COPYCTX
> Available space:3552
> Using badly built context - ERR: BAD MAGIC !
> Calling sigreturn with fake sigframe sized:4688 at SP @FFFFE77C96D0
> SIG_OK -- SP:0xFFFFE77C96D0 si_addr@:(nil) si_code:1 token@:(nil) offset:0
> current->token ZEROED...test is probably broken! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> -- RX UNEXPECTED SIGNAL: 6
> ==>> completed. FAIL(0)
OK, seems reasonable.
I was just curious as to how you'd approached it.
Cheers
---Dave
