From patchwork Fri Jun 23 10:40:07 2023 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: "Xu, Haibo1" X-Patchwork-Id: 13290335 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 881BAEB64DD for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 10:36:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232253AbjFWKgF (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2023 06:36:05 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40418 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232343AbjFWKfu (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2023 06:35:50 -0400 Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9166A2706; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 03:35:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1687516542; x=1719052542; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rBFu+kBGGrTvYe0HgskYar8sc+5gymxxNHT6tyryTg0=; b=eoO/kZspNCgV1DuX9ab6hA+AXr56HWp/SyubgVC26irM6f7vXkE0GOpX 1LhmsnpMG8cN/IGohTyTknz2Y6R8wj7o6QNQ24K1/UT/94KIUKfPaVa+N bDedpB+y2ff5flQSoZDp9B3RmpRNSeGCO2IpKtJccIF78QAh+zNMmkNfK HqfJ/2I8+zzWBjf4C6Meun1OaygRoy9rc9ekWA2zYY538svSNEiHHHNIS 3Arli4tXhAewEzZymbxs1L0ND1DQE9daTpPafRkRZ2i06OaZmC8UOj7sO QEv3TF8+m3aeS8Ma5rNx6G9/Tz64SQ+U5Y5rnzbcKkvYZ/VFae098ziU4 w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10749"; a="447112475" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,151,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="447112475" Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Jun 2023 03:35:41 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10749"; a="715275987" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,151,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="715275987" Received: from haibo-optiplex-7090.sh.intel.com ([10.239.159.132]) by orsmga002-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Jun 2023 03:35:34 -0700 From: Haibo Xu Cc: xiaobo55x@gmail.com, haibo1.xu@intel.com, ajones@ventanamicro.com, maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, seanjc@google.com, Paolo Bonzini , Jonathan Corbet , Anup Patel , Atish Patra , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Shuah Khan , James Morse , Suzuki K Poulose , Zenghui Yu , Ben Gardon , David Matlack , Ricardo Koller , Vishal Annapurve , Vipin Sharma , Colton Lewis , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev Subject: [PATCH v4 05/12] KVM: arm64: selftests: Delete core_reg_fixup Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 18:40:07 +0800 Message-Id: X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org From: Andrew Jones core_reg_fixup() complicates sharing the get-reg-list test with other architectures. Rather than work at keeping it, with plenty of #ifdeffery, just delete it, as it's unlikely to test a kernel based on anything older than v5.2 with the get-reg-list test, which is a test meant to check for regressions in new kernels. (And, an older version of the test can still be used for older kernels if necessary.) Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones Signed-off-by: Haibo Xu --- .../selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c | 83 +++---------------- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c index aae2056379f7..c8b44389d2ee 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c @@ -17,12 +17,10 @@ * by running the test with the --list command line argument. * * Note, the blessed list should be created from the oldest possible - * kernel. We can't go older than v4.15, though, because that's the first - * release to expose the ID system registers in KVM_GET_REG_LIST, see - * commit 93390c0a1b20 ("arm64: KVM: Hide unsupported AArch64 CPU features - * from guests"). Also, one must use the --core-reg-fixup command line - * option when running on an older kernel that doesn't include df205b5c6328 - * ("KVM: arm64: Filter out invalid core register IDs in KVM_GET_REG_LIST") + * kernel. We can't go older than v5.2, though, because that's the first + * release which includes df205b5c6328 ("KVM: arm64: Filter out invalid + * core register IDs in KVM_GET_REG_LIST"). Without that commit the core + * registers won't match expectations. */ #include #include @@ -269,63 +267,6 @@ static void print_reg(const char *prefix, __u64 id) } } -/* - * Older kernels listed each 32-bit word of CORE registers separately. - * For 64 and 128-bit registers we need to ignore the extra words. We - * also need to fixup the sizes, because the older kernels stated all - * registers were 64-bit, even when they weren't. - */ -static void core_reg_fixup(void) -{ - struct kvm_reg_list *tmp; - __u64 id, core_off; - int i; - - tmp = calloc(1, sizeof(*tmp) + reg_list->n * sizeof(__u64)); - - for (i = 0; i < reg_list->n; ++i) { - id = reg_list->reg[i]; - - if ((id & KVM_REG_ARM_COPROC_MASK) != KVM_REG_ARM_CORE) { - tmp->reg[tmp->n++] = id; - continue; - } - - core_off = id & ~REG_MASK; - - switch (core_off) { - case 0x52: case 0xd2: case 0xd6: - /* - * These offsets are pointing at padding. - * We need to ignore them too. - */ - continue; - case KVM_REG_ARM_CORE_REG(fp_regs.vregs[0]) ... - KVM_REG_ARM_CORE_REG(fp_regs.vregs[31]): - if (core_off & 3) - continue; - id &= ~KVM_REG_SIZE_MASK; - id |= KVM_REG_SIZE_U128; - tmp->reg[tmp->n++] = id; - continue; - case KVM_REG_ARM_CORE_REG(fp_regs.fpsr): - case KVM_REG_ARM_CORE_REG(fp_regs.fpcr): - id &= ~KVM_REG_SIZE_MASK; - id |= KVM_REG_SIZE_U32; - tmp->reg[tmp->n++] = id; - continue; - default: - if (core_off & 1) - continue; - tmp->reg[tmp->n++] = id; - break; - } - } - - free(reg_list); - reg_list = tmp; -} - static void prepare_vcpu_init(struct vcpu_reg_list *c, struct kvm_vcpu_init *init) { struct vcpu_reg_sublist *s; @@ -364,7 +305,6 @@ static void check_supported(struct vcpu_reg_list *c) static bool print_list; static bool print_filtered; -static bool fixup_core_regs; static void run_test(struct vcpu_reg_list *c) { @@ -385,9 +325,6 @@ static void run_test(struct vcpu_reg_list *c) reg_list = vcpu_get_reg_list(vcpu); - if (fixup_core_regs) - core_reg_fixup(); - if (print_list || print_filtered) { putchar('\n'); for_each_reg(i) { @@ -515,7 +452,7 @@ static void help(void) printf( "\n" - "usage: get-reg-list [--config=] [--list] [--list-filtered] [--core-reg-fixup]\n\n" + "usage: get-reg-list [--config=] [--list] [--list-filtered]\n\n" " --config= Used to select a specific vcpu configuration for the test/listing\n" " '' may be\n"); @@ -529,7 +466,6 @@ static void help(void) "\n" " --list Print the register list rather than test it (requires --config)\n" " --list-filtered Print registers that would normally be filtered out (requires --config)\n" - " --core-reg-fixup Needed when running on old kernels with broken core reg listings\n" "\n" ); } @@ -561,9 +497,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av) pid_t pid; for (i = 1; i < ac; ++i) { - if (strcmp(av[i], "--core-reg-fixup") == 0) - fixup_core_regs = true; - else if (strncmp(av[i], "--config", 8) == 0) + if (strncmp(av[i], "--config", 8) == 0) sel = parse_config(av[i]); else if (strcmp(av[i], "--list") == 0) print_list = true; @@ -606,8 +540,11 @@ int main(int ac, char **av) } /* - * The current blessed list was primed with the output of kernel version + * The original blessed list was primed with the output of kernel version * v4.15 with --core-reg-fixup and then later updated with new registers. + * (The --core-reg-fixup option and it's fixup function have been removed + * from the test, as it's unlikely to use this type of test on a kernel + * older than v5.2.) * * The blessed list is up to date with kernel version v6.4 (or so we hope) */