> -----Original Message----- > From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 9:10 AM > To: Dhanraj, Vijay <vijay.dhanraj@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-sgx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Chatre, Reinette > <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx>; dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Huang, Haitao > <haitao.huang@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add SGX selftest `augment_via_eaccept_long` > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 01:45:35PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 06:29:13PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 01:00:54PM +0000, Dhanraj, Vijay wrote: > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 5:18 AM > > > > > To: Dhanraj, Vijay <vijay.dhanraj@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Cc: linux-sgx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Chatre, Reinette > > > > > <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx>; dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Huang, > > > > > Haitao <haitao.huang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add SGX selftest `augment_via_eaccept_long` > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 01:14:56PM -0700, vijay.dhanraj@xxxxxxxxx > wrote: > > > > > > From: Vijay Dhanraj <vijay.dhanraj@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > This commit adds a new test case which is same as > > > > > > `augment_via_eaccept` but adds more number of EPC pages to > > > > > > stress test > > > > > `EAUG` via `EACCEPT`. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vijay Dhanraj <vijay.dhanraj@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > Hey, to reproduce the original issue: does it reproduce on VM or > > > > > should I run baremetal kernel? > > > > > > > > > > BR, Jarkko > > > > > > > > Hi Jarkko, The issue should be reproducible on baremetal kernel. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > I need comment out other tests in order to make sane out of this :-) > > > > Mentioning this because came into realization that stress tests should > > be IMHO moved each to a separate binary (so that they can be run > > separately). Just a note (TODO) to myself. > > > > I'll work on this today again and *possibly* split your test to its > > own application to get a starting point for forementioned. > > I got > > # RUN enclave.augment_via_eaccept_long ... > # main.c:1241:augment_via_eaccept_long:test enclave: total_size = 8192, > seg->size = 8192 # main.c:1241:augment_via_eaccept_long:test enclave: > total_size = 12288, seg->size = 4096 # > main.c:1241:augment_via_eaccept_long:test enclave: total_size = 36864, > seg->size = 24576 # main.c:1241:augment_via_eaccept_long:test enclave: > total_size = 40960, seg->size = 4096 # > main.c:1259:augment_via_eaccept_long:mmaping pages at end of enclave... > # main.c:1273:augment_via_eaccept_long:Entering enclave to run EACCEPT > for each page of 8589934592 bytes may take a while ... > # OK enclave.augment_via_eaccept_long > > The CPU used for testing was according to /proc/cpuinfo: > > model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6338 CPU @ 2.00GHz > > I have couple of queries: > > 1. Is it possible to get dmesg output? I did check the dmesg output but couldn't find anything related to the failure. Just the general log messages. > 2. Do I have to repeat the test multiple times, or does it > occur unconditionaly? > I was able to repro every time but it was a bit sporadic for Haitao. > BR, Jarkko Also, did you set the PRMRR size to 2GB per socket in the BIOS? The issue is only reproduced for oversubscribed scenario. When I set my PRMRR to 64GB per socket, I wasn't able to repro the issue. Regards, Vijay
