On 24/06/2021 14.01, Janosch Frank wrote:
Let's also check the PEI values to make sure our VSIE implementation
is correct.
Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
s390x/Makefile | 2 +
s390x/mvpg-sie.c | 150 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c | 33 +++++++
s390x/unittests.cfg | 3 +
4 files changed, 188 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 s390x/mvpg-sie.c
create mode 100644 s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c
diff --git a/s390x/Makefile b/s390x/Makefile
index ba32f4c..07af26d 100644
--- a/s390x/Makefile
+++ b/s390x/Makefile
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ tests += $(TEST_DIR)/sie.elf
tests += $(TEST_DIR)/mvpg.elf
tests += $(TEST_DIR)/uv-host.elf
tests += $(TEST_DIR)/edat.elf
+tests += $(TEST_DIR)/mvpg-sie.elf
tests_binary = $(patsubst %.elf,%.bin,$(tests))
ifneq ($(HOST_KEY_DOCUMENT),)
@@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ snippet_asmlib = $(SNIPPET_DIR)/c/cstart.o
# perquisites (=guests) for the snippet hosts.
# $(TEST_DIR)/<snippet-host>.elf: snippets = $(SNIPPET_DIR)/<c/asm>/<snippet>.gbin
+$(TEST_DIR)/mvpg-sie.elf: snippets = $(SNIPPET_DIR)/c/mvpg-snippet.gbin
$(SNIPPET_DIR)/asm/%.gbin: $(SNIPPET_DIR)/asm/%.o $(FLATLIBS)
$(OBJCOPY) -O binary $(patsubst %.gbin,%.o,$@) $@
diff --git a/s390x/mvpg-sie.c b/s390x/mvpg-sie.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a18c1b0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/s390x/mvpg-sie.c
@@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
+#include <libcflat.h>
+#include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
+#include <asm-generic/barrier.h>
+#include <asm/interrupt.h>
+#include <asm/pgtable.h>
+#include <mmu.h>
+#include <asm/page.h>
+#include <asm/facility.h>
+#include <asm/mem.h>
+#include <asm/sigp.h>
+#include <smp.h>
+#include <alloc_page.h>
+#include <bitops.h>
+#include <vm.h>
+#include <sclp.h>
+#include <sie.h>
The list of headers that get included here is rather long for this file that
is rather short ... e.g. do we really need such headers like sigp.h and
sclp.h here?
+static u8 *guest;
+static u8 *guest_instr;
+static struct vm vm;
+
+static uint8_t *src;
+static uint8_t *dst;
+static uint8_t *cmp;
+
+extern const char _binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_start[];
+extern const char _binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_end[];
+int binary_size;
+
+static void sie(struct vm *vm)
+{
+ /* Reset icptcode so we don't trip below */
+ vm->sblk->icptcode = 0;
+
+ while (vm->sblk->icptcode == 0) {
+ sie64a(vm->sblk, &vm->save_area);
+ if (vm->sblk->icptcode == ICPT_VALIDITY)
+ assert(0);
assert(vm->sblk->icptcode != ICPT_VALIDITY)
?
+ }
+ vm->save_area.guest.grs[14] = vm->sblk->gg14;
+ vm->save_area.guest.grs[15] = vm->sblk->gg15;
+}
+
+static void test_mvpg_pei(void)
+{
+ uint64_t **pei_dst = (uint64_t **)((uintptr_t) vm.sblk + 0xc0);
+ uint64_t **pei_src = (uint64_t **)((uintptr_t) vm.sblk + 0xc8);
Hmm, magic values ... according to the public SA22-7095-0 from 1984, the
array at offset 0xc0 is called "Interruption parameters" ... could we maybe
at least use a similar name in our
kvm_s390_sie_block?
+ report_prefix_push("pei");
+
+ report_prefix_push("src");
+ memset(dst, 0, PAGE_SIZE);
+ protect_page(src, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
+ sie(&vm);
+ report(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_PARTEXEC, "Partial execution");
+ report((uintptr_t)**pei_src == ((uintptr_t)vm.sblk->mso) + 0x6000 + PAGE_ENTRY_I, "PEI_SRC correct");
+ report((uintptr_t)**pei_dst == vm.sblk->mso + 0x5000, "PEI_DST correct");
+ unprotect_page(src, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
+ report(!memcmp(cmp, dst, PAGE_SIZE), "Destination intact");
+ /* Jump over the diag44 */
+ sie(&vm);
+ assert(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_INST &&
+ vm.sblk->ipa == 0x8300 && vm.sblk->ipb == 0x440000);
Maybe add a comment about the magic values?
+ report_prefix_pop();
+
+ /* Clear PEI data for next check */
+ report_prefix_push("dst");
+ memset((uint64_t *)((uintptr_t) vm.sblk + 0xc0), 0, 16);
+ memset(dst, 0, PAGE_SIZE);
+ protect_page(dst, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
+ sie(&vm);
+ report(vm.sblk->icptcode == ICPT_PARTEXEC, "Partial execution");
+ report((uintptr_t)**pei_src == vm.sblk->mso + 0x6000, "PEI_SRC correct");
+ report((uintptr_t)**pei_dst == vm.sblk->mso + 0x5000 + PAGE_ENTRY_I, "PEI_DST correct");
+ /* Needed for the memcmp and general cleanup */
+ unprotect_page(dst, PAGE_ENTRY_I);
+ report(!memcmp(cmp, dst, PAGE_SIZE), "Destination intact");
+ report_prefix_pop();
+
+ report_prefix_pop();
+}
+
+static void test_mvpg(void)
+{
+ int binary_size = ((uintptr_t)_binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_end -
+ (uintptr_t)_binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_start);
+
+ memcpy(guest, _binary_s390x_snippets_c_mvpg_snippet_gbin_start, binary_size);
+ memset(src, 0x42, PAGE_SIZE);
+ memset(dst, 0x43, PAGE_SIZE);
+ sie(&vm);
+ mb();
+ report(!memcmp(src, dst, PAGE_SIZE) && *dst == 0x42, "Page moved");
+}
+
+static void setup_guest(void)
+{
+ setup_vm();
+
+ /* Allocate 1MB as guest memory */
+ guest = alloc_pages(8);
+ /* The first two pages are the lowcore */
+ guest_instr = guest + PAGE_SIZE * 2;
+
+ vm.sblk = alloc_page();
+
+ vm.sblk->cpuflags = CPUSTAT_ZARCH | CPUSTAT_RUNNING;
+ vm.sblk->prefix = 0;
+ /*
+ * Pageable guest with the same ASCE as the test programm, but
+ * the guest memory 0x0 is offset to start at the allocated
+ * guest pages and end after 1MB.
+ *
+ * It's not pretty but faster and easier than managing guest ASCEs.
+ */
+ vm.sblk->mso = (u64)guest;
+ vm.sblk->msl = (u64)guest;
+ vm.sblk->ihcpu = 0xffff;
+
+ vm.sblk->crycbd = (uint64_t)alloc_page();
+
+ vm.sblk->gpsw.addr = PAGE_SIZE * 4;
+ vm.sblk->gpsw.mask = 0x0000000180000000ULL;
+ vm.sblk->ictl = ICTL_OPEREXC | ICTL_PINT;
+ /* Enable MVPG interpretation as we want to test KVM and not ourselves */
+ vm.sblk->eca = ECA_MVPGI;
+
+ src = guest + PAGE_SIZE * 6;
+ dst = guest + PAGE_SIZE * 5;
+ cmp = alloc_page();
+ memset(cmp, 0, PAGE_SIZE);
+}
+
+int main(void)
+{
+ report_prefix_push("mvpg-sie");
+ if (!sclp_facilities.has_sief2) {
+ report_skip("SIEF2 facility unavailable");
+ goto done;
+ }
+
+ setup_guest();
+ test_mvpg();
+ test_mvpg_pei();
+
+done:
+ report_prefix_pop();
+ return report_summary();
+
+}
diff --git a/s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c b/s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..96b70c9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/s390x/snippets/c/mvpg-snippet.c
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+#include <libcflat.h>
+
+static inline void force_exit(void)
+{
+ asm volatile(" diag 0,0,0x44\n");
+}
+
+static inline int mvpg(unsigned long r0, void *dest, void *src)
+{
+ register unsigned long reg0 asm ("0") = r0;
+ int cc;
+
+ asm volatile(" mvpg %1,%2\n"
+ " ipm %0\n"
+ " srl %0,28"
+ : "=&d" (cc) : "a" (dest), "a" (src), "d" (reg0)
Why is cc marked with "&" here?
Thomas
