From patchwork Thu Jan 30 06:36:51 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Sandipan Das X-Patchwork-Id: 1231308 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 487WMm56Xsz9s1x for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:55:48 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 487WMm4TMLzDqY4 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:55:48 +1100 (AEDT) X-Original-To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=sandipan@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 487Vyx6wfjzDqQg for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:37:45 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 00U6aPpS009207 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 01:37:43 -0500 Received: from e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.100]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2xubct247u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 01:37:42 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 06:37:41 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.194) by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.134) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 30 Jan 2020 06:37:36 -0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 00U6bZ4c26476672 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 30 Jan 2020 06:37:35 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA7F4C046; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 06:37:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC844C04A; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 06:37:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fir03.in.ibm.com (unknown [9.121.59.65]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 06:37:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Sandipan Das To: shuah@kernel.org, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v18 09/24] selftests/vm/pkeys: Fix assertion in pkey_disable_set/clear() Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 12:06:51 +0530 X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: References: In-Reply-To: References: X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 20013006-0016-0000-0000-000002E1F2E6 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 20013006-0017-0000-0000-00003344BBBF Message-Id: <90e6851e1c71696f03cfa2c71377f0542d8dbd8d.1580365432.git.sandipan@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-01-30_01:2020-01-28, 2020-01-30 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=608 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1911200001 definitions=main-2001300042 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, fweimer@redhat.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, x86@kernel.org, linuxram@us.ibm.com, mhocko@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mingo@redhat.com, msuchanek@suse.de, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, bauerman@linux.ibm.com Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+patchwork-incoming=ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" From: Ram Pai In some cases, a pkey's bits need not necessarily change in a way that the value of the pkey register increases when performing a pkey_disable_set() or decreases when performing a pkey_disable_clear(). For example, on powerpc, if a pkey's current state is PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS and we perform a pkey_write_disable() on it, the bits still remain the same. We will observe something similar when the pkey's current state is 0 and a pkey_access_enable() is performed on it. Either case would cause some assertions to fail. This fixes the problem. cc: Dave Hansen cc: Florian Weimer Signed-off-by: Ram Pai Signed-off-by: Sandipan Das --- tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c index 4b1ddb526228..7fd52d5c4bfd 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/protection_keys.c @@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ void pkey_disable_set(int pkey, int flags) dprintf1("%s(%d) pkey_reg: 0x%016llx\n", __func__, pkey, read_pkey_reg()); if (flags) - pkey_assert(read_pkey_reg() > orig_pkey_reg); + pkey_assert(read_pkey_reg() >= orig_pkey_reg); dprintf1("END<---%s(%d, 0x%x)\n", __func__, pkey, flags); } @@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ void pkey_disable_clear(int pkey, int flags) dprintf1("%s(%d) pkey_reg: 0x%016llx\n", __func__, pkey, read_pkey_reg()); if (flags) - assert(read_pkey_reg() < orig_pkey_reg); + assert(read_pkey_reg() <= orig_pkey_reg); } void pkey_write_allow(int pkey)