| Message ID | 20230717062343.3743-5-cloudliang@tencent.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | KVM: selftests: Improve PMU event filter settings and add test cases | expand |
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 02:23:41PM +0800, Jinrong Liang <ljr.kernel@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com> > > Add test cases to verify the handling of unsupported input values for the > PMU event filter. The tests cover unsupported "action" values, unsupported > "flags" values, and unsupported "nevents" values. All these cases should > return an error, as they are currently not supported by the filter. > Furthermore, the tests also cover the scenario where setting non-existent > fixed counters in the fixed bitmap does not fail. > > Signed-off-by: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com> > --- > .../kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c > index ffcbbf25b29b..63f85f583ef8 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c > @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ > #define MAX_FILTER_EVENTS 300 > #define MAX_TEST_EVENTS 10 > > +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION (KVM_PMU_EVENT_DENY + 1) > +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS (KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS + 1) flag is a bit mask. Not number. So +1 sounds weird. As KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAGS_VALID_MASK = 1, this happens to get wanted result, though. > +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS (MAX_FILTER_EVENTS + 1) > + > /* > * This is how the event selector and unit mask are stored in an AMD > * core performance event-select register. Intel's format is similar, > @@ -757,6 +761,8 @@ static int set_pmu_single_event_filter(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint64_t event, > > static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > + uint8_t nr_fixed_counters = kvm_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_NR_FIXED_COUNTERS); > + struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter f; > uint64_t e = ~0ul; > int r; > > @@ -777,6 +783,26 @@ static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS, > KVM_PMU_EVENT_ALLOW); > TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Valid PMU Event Filter is failing"); > + > + f = base_event_filter; > + f.action = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION; > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid action is expected to fail"); > + > + f = base_event_filter; > + f.flags = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS; > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid flags is expected to fail"); > + > + f = base_event_filter; > + f.nevents = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS; > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Exceeding the max number of filter events should fail"); > + > + f = base_event_filter; > + f.fixed_counter_bitmap = ~GENMASK_ULL(nr_fixed_counters, 0); > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > + TEST_ASSERT(!r, "Masking non-existent fixed counters should be allowed"); > } > > int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > -- > 2.39.3 >
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com> 于2023年7月19日周三 09:17写道： > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 02:23:41PM +0800, > Jinrong Liang <ljr.kernel@gmail.com> wrote: > > > From: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com> > > > > Add test cases to verify the handling of unsupported input values for the > > PMU event filter. The tests cover unsupported "action" values, unsupported > > "flags" values, and unsupported "nevents" values. All these cases should > > return an error, as they are currently not supported by the filter. > > Furthermore, the tests also cover the scenario where setting non-existent > > fixed counters in the fixed bitmap does not fail. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com> > > --- > > .../kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c > > index ffcbbf25b29b..63f85f583ef8 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c > > @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ > > #define MAX_FILTER_EVENTS 300 > > #define MAX_TEST_EVENTS 10 > > > > +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION (KVM_PMU_EVENT_DENY + 1) > > +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS (KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS + 1) > > flag is a bit mask. Not number. So +1 sounds weird. > As KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAGS_VALID_MASK = 1, this happens to get wanted result, though. We need an invalid flags, KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAGS_VALID_MASK is actually equal to KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS. In kvm.h: #define KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS BIT(0) #define KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAGS_VALID_MASK (KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS) How about this modification: #define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS (KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAGS_VALID_MASK << 1) > > > > +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS (MAX_FILTER_EVENTS + 1) > > + > > /* > > * This is how the event selector and unit mask are stored in an AMD > > * core performance event-select register. Intel's format is similar, > > @@ -757,6 +761,8 @@ static int set_pmu_single_event_filter(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint64_t event, > > > > static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > { > > + uint8_t nr_fixed_counters = kvm_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_NR_FIXED_COUNTERS); > > + struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter f; > > uint64_t e = ~0ul; > > int r; > > > > @@ -777,6 +783,26 @@ static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS, > > KVM_PMU_EVENT_ALLOW); > > TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Valid PMU Event Filter is failing"); > > + > > + f = base_event_filter; > > + f.action = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION; > > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > > + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid action is expected to fail"); > > + > > + f = base_event_filter; > > + f.flags = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS; > > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > > + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid flags is expected to fail"); > > + > > + f = base_event_filter; > > + f.nevents = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS; > > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > > + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Exceeding the max number of filter events should fail"); > > + > > + f = base_event_filter; > > + f.fixed_counter_bitmap = ~GENMASK_ULL(nr_fixed_counters, 0); > > + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); > > + TEST_ASSERT(!r, "Masking non-existent fixed counters should be allowed"); > > } > > > > int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > > -- > > 2.39.3 > > > > -- > Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c index ffcbbf25b29b..63f85f583ef8 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ #define MAX_FILTER_EVENTS 300 #define MAX_TEST_EVENTS 10 +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION (KVM_PMU_EVENT_DENY + 1) +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS (KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS + 1) +#define PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS (MAX_FILTER_EVENTS + 1) + /* * This is how the event selector and unit mask are stored in an AMD * core performance event-select register. Intel's format is similar, @@ -757,6 +761,8 @@ static int set_pmu_single_event_filter(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint64_t event, static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { + uint8_t nr_fixed_counters = kvm_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_NR_FIXED_COUNTERS); + struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter f; uint64_t e = ~0ul; int r; @@ -777,6 +783,26 @@ static void test_filter_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS, KVM_PMU_EVENT_ALLOW); TEST_ASSERT(r == 0, "Valid PMU Event Filter is failing"); + + f = base_event_filter; + f.action = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_ACTION; + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid action is expected to fail"); + + f = base_event_filter; + f.flags = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_FLAGS; + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Set invalid flags is expected to fail"); + + f = base_event_filter; + f.nevents = PMU_EVENT_FILTER_INVALID_NEVENTS; + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); + TEST_ASSERT(r, "Exceeding the max number of filter events should fail"); + + f = base_event_filter; + f.fixed_counter_bitmap = ~GENMASK_ULL(nr_fixed_counters, 0); + r = do_vcpu_set_pmu_event_filter(vcpu, &f); + TEST_ASSERT(!r, "Masking non-existent fixed counters should be allowed"); } int main(int argc, char *argv[])