On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:19:11PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 06/14/2018 02:44 AM, Ram Pai wrote:
> >Test
> >----
> >Verified for correctness on powerpc. Need help verifying on x86.
> >Compiles on x86.
>
> It breaks make in tools/testing/selftests/x86:
>
> make: *** No rule to make target `protection_keys.c', needed by
> `/home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys_64'. Stop.
Ah.. it has to be taken out from the Makefile of
/home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/x86/
The sources have been moved to /home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/mm/
>
> The generic implementation no longer builds 32-bit binaries. Is
> this the intent?
No. But building it 32-bit after moving it to a the new directory
needs some special code in the Makefile.
>
> It's possible to build 32-bit binaries with “make CC='gcc -m32'”, so
> perhaps this is good enough?
Dave Hansen did mention it, but he did not complain too much. So I kept
quite.
>
> But with that, I get a warning:
>
> protection_keys.c: In function ‘dump_mem’:
> protection_keys.c:172:3: warning: format ‘%lx’ expects argument of
> type ‘long unsigned int’, but argument 4 has type ‘uint64_t’
> [-Wformat=]
> dprintf1("dump[%03d][@%p]: %016lx\n", i, ptr, *ptr);
> ^
>
> I suppose you could use %016llx and add a cast to unsigned long long
> to fix this.
yes.
>
> Anyway, both the 32-bit and 64-bit tests fail here:
>
> assert() at protection_keys.c::943 test_nr: 12 iteration: 1
> running abort_hooks()...
>
> I've yet checked what causes this. It's with the kernel headers
> from 4.17, but with other userspace headers based on glibc 2.17. I
> hope to look into this some more before the weekend, but I
> eventually have to return the test machine to the pool.
I wish I could get a x86 machine which could do memory keys. Had a AWS
instance, but struggled to boot my kernel. Can't get to the console...
gave up. If someone can give me a ready-made machine with support for
memkeys, I can quickly fix all the outstanding x86 issues. But if
someone can just fix it for me, .... ;)
RP
