| Message ID | 20171215190111.14866-1-antonio.argenziano@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2017-12-15 19:01:11) > Since commit: drm/i915/scheduler: Support user-defined priorities, the > driver support an extra context param to set context's priority. Add > tests for that interface and update invalid tests. > > Signed-off-by: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenziano@intel.com> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> > Cc: Michal Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com> > --- > tests/gem_ctx_param.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_param.c b/tests/gem_ctx_param.c > index c20ae1ee..9a222e60 100644 > --- a/tests/gem_ctx_param.c > +++ b/tests/gem_ctx_param.c > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ > */ > > #include "igt.h" > +#include <limits.h> > > IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Basic test for context set/get param input validation."); > > @@ -136,11 +137,85 @@ igt_main > gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); > } > > +#define MAX_PRIO 1023 > +#define MIN_PRIO -MAX_PRIO > +#define DEF_PRIO 0 Take these from the uapi header. > + > + arg.param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY; > + > + igt_subtest("root-set-priority") { > + arg.ctx_id = ctx; > + arg.size = 0; > + Bonus points for CAP_SYS_NICE checking. arg.size validation checking. arg.value > u32 (checking for overflows) gem_context_get_param() of a new context should return DEF_PRIO set_param on older machines returns -ENODEV And that's not even trying to fuzz bad values beyond the sanity checks of I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY. > + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= MAX_PRIO; i += 1023) { It's a couple of ioctls, do all 1024. Do them in a random order, trust no one. > + arg.value = i; > + gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); > + > + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); > + igt_assert(arg.value == i); /* Verify prio was set */ igt_assert_eq(arg.value, i); But doesn't verify the priority does anything. Just the RTT in the API, which is a nice verification nevertheless. > + } > + } > + > + igt_subtest("root-set-priority-invalid-value") { > + int prio_levels[] = {INT_MIN, MIN_PRIO - 1, MAX_PRIO + 1, INT_MAX}; > + int old_value; > + arg.ctx_id = ctx; > + > + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); > + old_value = arg.value; > + > + for (int i = 0; i < (sizeof(prio_levels) / sizeof(int)); i++) { ARRAY_SIZE(prio_levels); > + arg.value = prio_levels[i]; > + igt_assert_eq(__gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg), -EINVAL); > + > + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); > + igt_assert(arg.value == old_value); /* Verify prio was not set */ > + } > + } > + > + igt_subtest("user-set-priority") { > + arg.size = 0; > + > + igt_fork(child, 1) { > + igt_drop_root(); > + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= DEF_PRIO; i += 1023) { > + arg.value = i; > + gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); > + > + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); > + igt_assert(arg.value == i); /* Verify prio was set */ I wonder if the CAP_SYS_NICE limit might be adjusted in the future. Certainly preemption rules are flexible, as we haven't told anyone about them yet. -Chris
On 15/12/17 16:14, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2017-12-15 19:01:11) >> Since commit: drm/i915/scheduler: Support user-defined priorities, the >> driver support an extra context param to set context's priority. Add >> tests for that interface and update invalid tests. >> >> Signed-off-by: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenziano@intel.com> >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> >> Cc: Michal Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com> >> --- >> tests/gem_ctx_param.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_param.c b/tests/gem_ctx_param.c >> index c20ae1ee..9a222e60 100644 >> --- a/tests/gem_ctx_param.c >> +++ b/tests/gem_ctx_param.c >> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ >> */ >> >> #include "igt.h" >> +#include <limits.h> >> >> IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Basic test for context set/get param input validation."); >> >> @@ -136,11 +137,85 @@ igt_main >> gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); >> } >> >> +#define MAX_PRIO 1023 >> +#define MIN_PRIO -MAX_PRIO >> +#define DEF_PRIO 0 > > Take these from the uapi header. > >> + >> + arg.param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY; >> + >> + igt_subtest("root-set-priority") { >> + arg.ctx_id = ctx; >> + arg.size = 0; >> + > > Bonus points for CAP_SYS_NICE checking. > > arg.size validation checking. > arg.value > u32 (checking for overflows) What is the expectation for overflows? It looks like we only cast value to int. > > gem_context_get_param() of a new context should return DEF_PRIO > > set_param on older machines returns -ENODEV > > And that's not even trying to fuzz bad values beyond the sanity checks > of I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY. > >> + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= MAX_PRIO; i += 1023) { > > It's a couple of ioctls, do all 1024. Do them in a random order, trust > no one. Do we have a lib for doing that (generate a random permutation) already? > >> + arg.value = i; >> + gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); >> + >> + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); >> + igt_assert(arg.value == i); /* Verify prio was set */ > > igt_assert_eq(arg.value, i); > > But doesn't verify the priority does anything. Just the RTT in the API, > which is a nice verification nevertheless. > >> + } >> + } >> + >> + igt_subtest("root-set-priority-invalid-value") { >> + int prio_levels[] = {INT_MIN, MIN_PRIO - 1, MAX_PRIO + 1, INT_MAX}; >> + int old_value; >> + arg.ctx_id = ctx; >> + >> + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); >> + old_value = arg.value; >> + >> + for (int i = 0; i < (sizeof(prio_levels) / sizeof(int)); i++) { > > ARRAY_SIZE(prio_levels); > >> + arg.value = prio_levels[i]; >> + igt_assert_eq(__gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg), -EINVAL); >> + >> + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); >> + igt_assert(arg.value == old_value); /* Verify prio was not set */ >> + } >> + } >> + >> + igt_subtest("user-set-priority") { >> + arg.size = 0; >> + >> + igt_fork(child, 1) { >> + igt_drop_root(); >> + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= DEF_PRIO; i += 1023) { >> + arg.value = i; >> + gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); >> + >> + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); >> + igt_assert(arg.value == i); /* Verify prio was set */ > > I wonder if the CAP_SYS_NICE limit might be adjusted in the future. > Certainly preemption rules are flexible, as we haven't told anyone about > them yet. I guess when the change comes we will have a new constant we could swap DEF_PRIO with. -Antonio > -Chris >
Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2017-12-18 18:15:35) > > > On 15/12/17 16:14, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2017-12-15 19:01:11) > >> + arg.param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY; > >> + > >> + igt_subtest("root-set-priority") { > >> + arg.ctx_id = ctx; > >> + arg.size = 0; > >> + > > > > Bonus points for CAP_SYS_NICE checking. > > > > arg.size validation checking. > arg.value > u32 (checking for overflows) > > What is the expectation for overflows? It looks like we only cast value > to int. That was my point. We could create 1<<32 + prio, so we really should be failing with -EINVAL rather than setting the parameter to prio. Trust nothing, least of all the kernel. > > gem_context_get_param() of a new context should return DEF_PRIO > > > > set_param on older machines returns -ENODEV > > > > And that's not even trying to fuzz bad values beyond the sanity checks > > of I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY. > > > >> + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= MAX_PRIO; i += 1023) { > > > > It's a couple of ioctls, do all 1024. Do them in a random order, trust > > no one. > > Do we have a lib for doing that (generate a random permutation) already? See igt_permute_array. Maybe igt_random_array(count, prng_state). > >> + arg.value = prio_levels[i]; > >> + igt_assert_eq(__gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg), -EINVAL); > >> + > >> + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); > >> + igt_assert(arg.value == old_value); /* Verify prio was not set */ > >> + } > >> + } > >> + > >> + igt_subtest("user-set-priority") { > >> + arg.size = 0; > >> + > >> + igt_fork(child, 1) { > >> + igt_drop_root(); > >> + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= DEF_PRIO; i += 1023) { > >> + arg.value = i; > >> + gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); > >> + > >> + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); > >> + igt_assert(arg.value == i); /* Verify prio was set */ > > > > I wonder if the CAP_SYS_NICE limit might be adjusted in the future. > > Certainly preemption rules are flexible, as we haven't told anyone about > > them yet. > > I guess when the change comes we will have a new constant we could swap > DEF_PRIO with. The question is whether it is ABI, as it may be changed. If its not, don't enshrine it into law. -Chris
diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_param.c b/tests/gem_ctx_param.c index c20ae1ee..9a222e60 100644 --- a/tests/gem_ctx_param.c +++ b/tests/gem_ctx_param.c @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ */ #include "igt.h" +#include <limits.h> IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Basic test for context set/get param input validation."); @@ -136,11 +137,85 @@ igt_main gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); } +#define MAX_PRIO 1023 +#define MIN_PRIO -MAX_PRIO +#define DEF_PRIO 0 + + arg.param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY; + + igt_subtest("root-set-priority") { + arg.ctx_id = ctx; + arg.size = 0; + + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= MAX_PRIO; i += 1023) { + arg.value = i; + gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); + + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); + igt_assert(arg.value == i); /* Verify prio was set */ + } + } + + igt_subtest("root-set-priority-invalid-value") { + int prio_levels[] = {INT_MIN, MIN_PRIO - 1, MAX_PRIO + 1, INT_MAX}; + int old_value; + arg.ctx_id = ctx; + + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); + old_value = arg.value; + + for (int i = 0; i < (sizeof(prio_levels) / sizeof(int)); i++) { + arg.value = prio_levels[i]; + igt_assert_eq(__gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg), -EINVAL); + + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); + igt_assert(arg.value == old_value); /* Verify prio was not set */ + } + } + + igt_subtest("user-set-priority") { + arg.size = 0; + + igt_fork(child, 1) { + igt_drop_root(); + for (int i = MIN_PRIO; i <= DEF_PRIO; i += 1023) { + arg.value = i; + gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg); + + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); + igt_assert(arg.value == i); /* Verify prio was set */ + } + } + + igt_waitchildren(); + } + + igt_subtest("user-set-priority-invalid-value") { + int prio_levels[] = {DEF_PRIO + 1, MAX_PRIO}; + arg.ctx_id = ctx; + arg.size = 0; + + igt_fork(child, 1) { + igt_drop_root(); + + for (int i = 0; i < (sizeof(prio_levels) / sizeof(int)); i++) { + arg.value = prio_levels[i]; + igt_assert_eq(__gem_context_set_param(fd, &arg), -EPERM); + + gem_context_get_param(fd, &arg); + igt_assert(arg.value == DEF_PRIO); /* Verify prio was not set */ + } + } + + igt_waitchildren(); + } + + /* NOTE: This testcase intentionally tests for the next free parameter * to catch ABI extensions. Don't "fix" this testcase without adding all * the tests for the new param first. */ - arg.param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_BANNABLE + 1; + arg.param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY + 1; igt_subtest("invalid-param-get") { arg.ctx_id = ctx;
Since commit: drm/i915/scheduler: Support user-defined priorities, the driver support an extra context param to set context's priority. Add tests for that interface and update invalid tests. Signed-off-by: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenziano@intel.com> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Michal Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com> --- tests/gem_ctx_param.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)