Received: by 2002:a25:6193:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v141csp3255330ybb; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 01:19:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuAiel8/8Um/5Aa3hp9VFKPbMS02dsJhiALsOIU7WJOkfUPi9TbZxeqaqrypqqIC89bOv27 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:288:: with SMTP id z8mr1228487oic.149.1585642746073; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 01:19:06 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1585642746; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=iW9mNrVc/P+L7v6w85WO3eYXFWtcK+YDPwiXR/sTWwC5r5dfW5J1FiUZmJejytje/r qfY4KEWdOK036XSheQKuV/Take3rVB4B7uWTCpGEKj9/i5T+eo0MwUVHD+yZNaNV18Tl oTRIh85HRUxbm8wcBqC4Hjy0xjkNdaiN61DFoFAAQ67ODaY+WpgOsGnKP40EdQMzkBLB TcP2LLyGijagqcgcoBMN9mRL6nF9LwEzY9Xc6S/YYOT9hXYrJ0AlVuXLHKtwdAlkEyHW m2DM2TxCdrRFQqumok6hDPltzSeR9bietALBSLa49S16dVpxanrR86jfZI6JIg8hpVtu grCA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :dkim-signature; bh=P6E3VyXfLxlF9DVTkMR/YxJEZTjAoewX0d81DAmSyDI=; b=Oz6fBglSdja8s1AaWf41drBAMnWh3cPrueopo/etILGD2MDDVXc9n5bKcLF7VeRKTB Pf5ZfZOgZstqo3mCbJEqbIFe0XyFNgL7em8OCL+eUBi0Pdrdtn5KJz29VmLSb2/6Faet VNMxvi6046C+R/EGdYROEeBIdK1zSZdKjBHOxICLYghwM9fVylVqq0VVtP4wpvUluVUW QeQBbWPoTAlDFzzX6uppIr87wLnU9xsFHSLQqgwE8ME+eO/nxReE8gV9IAiBIyCIX6Kv k0wsTnp+jK+6BjvxoxEHcUJKLaLrHsnuLUYIHvlB1SI5XwMXNRuK4KL+ILzFXeoKMuxi r+Hg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=A+JueTyi; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c2si9772929ots.188.2020.03.31.01.18.53; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 01:19:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=A+JueTyi; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726397AbgCaIQq (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 04:16:46 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:39554 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730097AbgCaIQp (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 04:16:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1585642604; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=P6E3VyXfLxlF9DVTkMR/YxJEZTjAoewX0d81DAmSyDI=; b=A+JueTyiT/2QK7ggnQp6Kl/LhCbt6yMx303NRLc2nT0cDk5D9GozLBqOmxQNoGfjogDwKx frEGD6O3h+djdO8PLJV6ZJIEz4Xa0UCmoZs9wQ+iPLiSfPsTdxuysk6cB/mc7R8pOP78Jn j6tFqDwC+MCGiT9K3Qi9DHy49ZXJinw= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-258-MJ3ADzbsPfGZqkLniT-ASg-1; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 04:16:43 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MJ3ADzbsPfGZqkLniT-ASg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B3C41005509; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 08:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kamzik.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.40.193.153]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 628E660BE0; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 08:16:34 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 10:16:32 +0200 From: Andrew Jones To: Wainer dos Santos Moschetta Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, david@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: kvm: Add mem_slot_test test Message-ID: <20200331081632.ithcwuzjyjhiwphy@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> References: <20200330204310.21736-1-wainersm@redhat.com> <20200330204310.21736-3-wainersm@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200330204310.21736-3-wainersm@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 05:43:10PM -0300, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta wrote: > This patch introduces the mem_slot_test test which checks > an VM can have added memory slots up to the limit defined in > KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS. Then attempt to add one more slot to > verify it fails as expected. > > Signed-off-by: Wainer dos Santos Moschetta > --- > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore | 1 + > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 3 + > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 96 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore > index 30072c3f52fb..b1b94d50f6a2 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore > @@ -17,3 +17,4 @@ > /clear_dirty_log_test > /dirty_log_test > /kvm_create_max_vcpus > +/mem_slot_test > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile > index d91c53b726e6..070133349403 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile > @@ -30,16 +30,19 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += x86_64/svm_vmcall_test > TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += clear_dirty_log_test > TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += dirty_log_test > TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_create_max_vcpus > +TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += mem_slot_test > > TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += clear_dirty_log_test > TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += dirty_log_test > TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += kvm_create_max_vcpus > +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += mem_slot_test > > TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x = s390x/memop > TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += s390x/sync_regs_test > TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += s390x/resets > TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += dirty_log_test > TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += kvm_create_max_vcpus > +TEST_GEN_PROGS_s390x += mem_slot_test > > TEST_GEN_PROGS += $(TEST_GEN_PROGS_$(UNAME_M)) > LIBKVM += $(LIBKVM_$(UNAME_M)) > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..75d2bbd71642 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/mem_slot_test.c > @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > +/* > + * mem_slot_test > + * > + * Copyright (C) 2020, Red Hat, Inc. > + * > + * Test it can be added memory slots up to KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS, then any > + * tentative to add further slots should fail. > + */ > +#define _GNU_SOURCE /* for program_invocation_short_name */ > +#include > +#include > +#include > + > +#include "test_util.h" > +#include "kvm_util.h" > + > +/* Memory region flags */ > +#define MEM_REG_FLAGS KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES > + > +/* Guest VM mode */ > +#define GUEST_VM_MODE VM_MODE_DEFAULT I'm not sure what the value of the two defines above are. I'd prefer we avoid unnecessary renaming. Also, do we need KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES for this test? > + > +int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > +{ > + struct kvm_vm *vm; > + /* Maximum allowed number of memory slots */ > + uint32_t max_mem_slots; > + /* Slot number */ > + uint32_t slot; > + /* Number of pages in a memory region */ > + uint64_t mem_reg_npages; > + /* Memory region size */ > + uint64_t mem_reg_size; > + /* Guest physical memory guest_address */ > + uint64_t guest_addr; > + /* VM page size */ > + uint64_t vm_page_size; nit: IMO, the variable names above are descriptive enough to drop the comments. > + int ret; > + > + max_mem_slots = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS); > + TEST_ASSERT(max_mem_slots > 0, > + "KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS should be greater than 0"); > + DEBUG("Allowed number of memory slots: %i\n", max_mem_slots); DEBUG() no longer exists in kvm/queue. This should now be pr_debug(). > + > + vm = vm_create(GUEST_VM_MODE, 0, O_RDWR); > + > + /* Determine the minimal number of pages as possible per region. */ > + vm_page_size = vm_get_page_size(vm); > +#ifdef __s390x__ > + mem_reg_size = 0x100000; > +#else > + uint64_t host_page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE); > + > + mem_reg_size = (host_page_size > vm_page_size) ? host_page_size : > + vm_page_size; > +#endif > + mem_reg_npages = mem_reg_size / vm_page_size; On kvm/queue the above 11 lines can now all be done with mem_reg_size = SOME_ARBITRARY_MEM_REG_SIZE; mem_reg_npages = vm_calc_num_guest_pages(VM_MODE_DEFAULT, mem_reg_size); > + guest_addr = 0x0; > + > + /* Check it can be added memory slots up to the maximum allowed */ > + DEBUG("Adding slots 0..%i, each memory region with %ldK size\n", > + (max_mem_slots - 1), mem_reg_size >> 10); > + for (slot = 0; slot < max_mem_slots; slot++) { > + vm_userspace_mem_region_add(vm, VM_MEM_SRC_ANONYMOUS, > + guest_addr, slot, mem_reg_npages, > + MEM_REG_FLAGS); > + guest_addr += mem_reg_size; > + } > + > + /* Check it cannot be added memory slots beyond the limit */ > + guest_addr += mem_reg_size; nit: shouldn't be necessary. We already incremented guest_addr on the last loop. > + void *mem = mmap(NULL, mem_reg_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, > + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0); > + TEST_ASSERT(mem != NULL, "Failed to mmap() host"); > + > + struct kvm_userspace_memory_region kvm_region = { > + .slot = slot, > + .flags = MEM_REG_FLAGS, > + .guest_phys_addr = guest_addr, > + .memory_size = mem_reg_size, > + .userspace_addr = (uint64_t) mem, > + }; > + > + ret = ioctl(vm_get_fd(vm), KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION, &kvm_region); > + TEST_ASSERT(ret == -1, "Adding one more memory slot should fail"); Shouldn't we also check that we get the correct errno? > + > + munmap(mem, mem_reg_size); > + kvm_vm_free(vm); > + > + return 0; > +} > -- > 2.17.2 > Thanks, drew