* [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
@ 2021-08-04 22:51 Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-05 9:37 ` David Hildenbrand
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-08-04 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Thomas Huth, Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier,
Cornelia Huck
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, Ilya Leoshkevich, Ulrich Weigand, qemu-devel,
Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel
Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported correctly
and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
---
v7: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
50e36dd61652.
tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 17 +-
tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py | 76 ++++++++
tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
index bd084c7840..cc64dd32d2 100644
--- a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
+++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
-VPATH+=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
+S390X_SRC=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
+VPATH+=$(S390X_SRC)
CFLAGS+=-march=zEC12 -m64
TESTS+=hello-s390x
TESTS+=csst
@@ -9,3 +10,17 @@ TESTS+=pack
TESTS+=mvo
TESTS+=mvc
TESTS+=trap
+TESTS+=signals-s390x
+
+ifneq ($(HAVE_GDB_BIN),)
+GDB_SCRIPT=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
+
+run-gdbstub-signals-s390x: signals-s390x
+ $(call run-test, $@, $(GDB_SCRIPT) \
+ --gdb $(HAVE_GDB_BIN) \
+ --qemu $(QEMU) --qargs "$(QEMU_OPTS)" \
+ --bin $< --test $(S390X_SRC)/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py, \
+ "mixing signals and debugging on s390x")
+
+EXTRA_RUNS += run-gdbstub-signals-s390x
+endif
diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..80a284b475
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+from __future__ import print_function
+
+#
+# Test that signals and debugging mix well together on s390x.
+#
+# This is launched via tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
+#
+
+import gdb
+import sys
+
+failcount = 0
+
+
+def report(cond, msg):
+ """Report success/fail of test"""
+ if cond:
+ print("PASS: %s" % (msg))
+ else:
+ print("FAIL: %s" % (msg))
+ global failcount
+ failcount += 1
+
+
+def run_test():
+ """Run through the tests one by one"""
+ illegal_op = gdb.Breakpoint("illegal_op")
+ stg = gdb.Breakpoint("stg")
+ mvc_8 = gdb.Breakpoint("mvc_8")
+
+ # Expect the following events:
+ # 1x illegal_op breakpoint
+ # 2x stg breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
+ # 2x mvc_8 breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
+ for _ in range(14):
+ gdb.execute("c")
+ report(illegal_op.hit_count == 1, "illegal_op.hit_count == 1")
+ report(stg.hit_count == 4, "stg.hit_count == 4")
+ report(mvc_8.hit_count == 4, "mvc_8.hit_count == 4")
+
+ # The test must succeed.
+ gdb.Breakpoint("_exit")
+ gdb.execute("c")
+ status = int(gdb.parse_and_eval("$r2"))
+ report(status == 0, "status == 0");
+
+
+#
+# This runs as the script it sourced (via -x, via run-test.py)
+#
+try:
+ inferior = gdb.selected_inferior()
+ arch = inferior.architecture()
+ print("ATTACHED: %s" % arch.name())
+except (gdb.error, AttributeError):
+ print("SKIPPING (not connected)", file=sys.stderr)
+ exit(0)
+
+if gdb.parse_and_eval("$pc") == 0:
+ print("SKIP: PC not set")
+ exit(0)
+
+try:
+ # These are not very useful in scripts
+ gdb.execute("set pagination off")
+ gdb.execute("set confirm off")
+
+ # Run the actual tests
+ run_test()
+except (gdb.error):
+ print("GDB Exception: %s" % (sys.exc_info()[0]))
+ failcount += 1
+ pass
+
+print("All tests complete: %d failures" % failcount)
+exit(failcount)
diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..dc2f8ee59a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
+#include <assert.h>
+#include <signal.h>
+#include <string.h>
+#include <sys/mman.h>
+#include <ucontext.h>
+#include <unistd.h>
+
+/*
+ * Various instructions that generate SIGILL and SIGSEGV. They could have been
+ * defined in a separate .s file, but this would complicate the build, so the
+ * inline asm is used instead.
+ */
+
+void illegal_op(void);
+void after_illegal_op(void);
+asm(".globl\tillegal_op\n"
+ "illegal_op:\t.byte\t0x00,0x00\n"
+ "\t.globl\tafter_illegal_op\n"
+ "after_illegal_op:\tbr\t%r14");
+
+void stg(void *dst, unsigned long src);
+asm(".globl\tstg\n"
+ "stg:\tstg\t%r3,0(%r2)\n"
+ "\tbr\t%r14");
+
+void mvc_8(void *dst, void *src);
+asm(".globl\tmvc_8\n"
+ "mvc_8:\tmvc\t0(8,%r2),0(%r3)\n"
+ "\tbr\t%r14");
+
+static void safe_puts(const char *s)
+{
+ write(0, s, strlen(s));
+ write(0, "\n", 1);
+}
+
+enum exception {
+ exception_operation,
+ exception_translation,
+ exception_protection,
+};
+
+static struct {
+ int sig;
+ void *addr;
+ unsigned long psw_addr;
+ enum exception exception;
+} expected;
+
+static void handle_signal(int sig, siginfo_t *info, void *ucontext)
+{
+ void *page;
+ int err;
+
+ if (sig != expected.sig) {
+ safe_puts("[ FAILED ] wrong signal");
+ _exit(1);
+ }
+
+ if (info->si_addr != expected.addr) {
+ safe_puts("[ FAILED ] wrong si_addr");
+ _exit(1);
+ }
+
+ if (((ucontext_t *)ucontext)->uc_mcontext.psw.addr != expected.psw_addr) {
+ safe_puts("[ FAILED ] wrong psw.addr");
+ _exit(1);
+ }
+
+ switch (expected.exception) {
+ case exception_translation:
+ page = mmap(expected.addr, 4096, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
+ MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_FIXED, -1, 0);
+ if (page != expected.addr) {
+ safe_puts("[ FAILED ] mmap() failed");
+ _exit(1);
+ }
+ break;
+ case exception_protection:
+ err = mprotect(expected.addr, 4096, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE);
+ if (err != 0) {
+ safe_puts("[ FAILED ] mprotect() failed");
+ _exit(1);
+ }
+ break;
+ default:
+ break;
+ }
+}
+
+static void check_sigsegv(void *func, enum exception exception,
+ unsigned long val)
+{
+ int prot;
+ unsigned long *page;
+ unsigned long *addr;
+ int err;
+
+ prot = exception == exception_translation ? PROT_NONE : PROT_READ;
+ page = mmap(NULL, 4096, prot, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
+ assert(page != MAP_FAILED);
+ if (exception == exception_translation) {
+ /* Hopefully nothing will be mapped at this address. */
+ err = munmap(page, 4096);
+ assert(err == 0);
+ }
+ addr = page + (val & 0x1ff);
+
+ expected.sig = SIGSEGV;
+ expected.addr = page;
+ expected.psw_addr = (unsigned long)func;
+ expected.exception = exception;
+ if (func == stg) {
+ stg(addr, val);
+ } else {
+ assert(func == mvc_8);
+ mvc_8(addr, &val);
+ }
+ assert(*addr == val);
+
+ err = munmap(page, 4096);
+ assert(err == 0);
+}
+
+int main(void)
+{
+ struct sigaction act;
+ int err;
+
+ memset(&act, 0, sizeof(act));
+ act.sa_sigaction = handle_signal;
+ act.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO;
+ err = sigaction(SIGILL, &act, NULL);
+ assert(err == 0);
+ err = sigaction(SIGSEGV, &act, NULL);
+ assert(err == 0);
+
+ safe_puts("[ RUN ] Operation exception");
+ expected.sig = SIGILL;
+ expected.addr = illegal_op;
+ expected.psw_addr = (unsigned long)after_illegal_op;
+ expected.exception = exception_operation;
+ illegal_op();
+ safe_puts("[ OK ]");
+
+ safe_puts("[ RUN ] Translation exception from stg");
+ check_sigsegv(stg, exception_translation, 42);
+ safe_puts("[ OK ]");
+
+ safe_puts("[ RUN ] Translation exception from mvc");
+ check_sigsegv(mvc_8, exception_translation, 4242);
+ safe_puts("[ OK ]");
+
+ safe_puts("[ RUN ] Protection exception from stg");
+ check_sigsegv(stg, exception_protection, 424242);
+ safe_puts("[ OK ]");
+
+ safe_puts("[ RUN ] Protection exception from mvc");
+ check_sigsegv(mvc_8, exception_protection, 42424242);
+ safe_puts("[ OK ]");
+
+ safe_puts("[ PASSED ]");
+
+ _exit(0);
+}
--
2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
2021-08-04 22:51 [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling Ilya Leoshkevich
@ 2021-08-05 9:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-08-05 9:57 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-06 5:25 ` Thomas Huth
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2021-08-05 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Ilya Leoshkevich, Thomas Huth, Richard Henderson, Laurent Vivier,
Cornelia Huck
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, Ulrich Weigand, qemu-devel,
Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel
On 05.08.21 00:51, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported correctly
> and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> v7: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
> v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
> 50e36dd61652.
>
> tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 17 +-
> tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py | 76 ++++++++
> tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
>
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> index bd084c7840..cc64dd32d2 100644
> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
> -VPATH+=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
> +S390X_SRC=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
> +VPATH+=$(S390X_SRC)
> CFLAGS+=-march=zEC12 -m64
> TESTS+=hello-s390x
> TESTS+=csst
> @@ -9,3 +10,17 @@ TESTS+=pack
> TESTS+=mvo
> TESTS+=mvc
> TESTS+=trap
> +TESTS+=signals-s390x
> +
> +ifneq ($(HAVE_GDB_BIN),)
> +GDB_SCRIPT=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
> +
> +run-gdbstub-signals-s390x: signals-s390x
> + $(call run-test, $@, $(GDB_SCRIPT) \
> + --gdb $(HAVE_GDB_BIN) \
> + --qemu $(QEMU) --qargs "$(QEMU_OPTS)" \
> + --bin $< --test $(S390X_SRC)/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py, \
> + "mixing signals and debugging on s390x")
> +
> +EXTRA_RUNS += run-gdbstub-signals-s390x
> +endif
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..80a284b475
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
> +from __future__ import print_function
> +
> +#
> +# Test that signals and debugging mix well together on s390x.
> +#
> +# This is launched via tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
> +#
> +
> +import gdb
> +import sys
> +
> +failcount = 0
> +
> +
> +def report(cond, msg):
> + """Report success/fail of test"""
> + if cond:
> + print("PASS: %s" % (msg))
> + else:
> + print("FAIL: %s" % (msg))
> + global failcount
> + failcount += 1
> +
> +
> +def run_test():
> + """Run through the tests one by one"""
> + illegal_op = gdb.Breakpoint("illegal_op")
> + stg = gdb.Breakpoint("stg")
> + mvc_8 = gdb.Breakpoint("mvc_8")
> +
> + # Expect the following events:
> + # 1x illegal_op breakpoint
> + # 2x stg breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
> + # 2x mvc_8 breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
> + for _ in range(14):
How do we come up with the value 14?
> + gdb.execute("c")
> + report(illegal_op.hit_count == 1, "illegal_op.hit_count == 1")
> + report(stg.hit_count == 4, "stg.hit_count == 4")
The doc above says we should see this twice, why do we see it 4 times?
> + report(mvc_8.hit_count == 4, "mvc_8.hit_count == 4")
> +
Dito
[...]
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..dc2f8ee59a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
> +#include <assert.h>
> +#include <signal.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +#include <sys/mman.h>
> +#include <ucontext.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * Various instructions that generate SIGILL and SIGSEGV. They could have been
> + * defined in a separate .s file, but this would complicate the build, so the
> + * inline asm is used instead.
> + */
> +
> +void illegal_op(void);
> +void after_illegal_op(void);
> +asm(".globl\tillegal_op\n"
> + "illegal_op:\t.byte\t0x00,0x00\n"
> + "\t.globl\tafter_illegal_op\n"
> + "after_illegal_op:\tbr\t%r14");
> +
> +void stg(void *dst, unsigned long src);
> +asm(".globl\tstg\n"
> + "stg:\tstg\t%r3,0(%r2)\n"
> + "\tbr\t%r14");
> +
> +void mvc_8(void *dst, void *src);
> +asm(".globl\tmvc_8\n"
> + "mvc_8:\tmvc\t0(8,%r2),0(%r3)\n"
> + "\tbr\t%r14");
I was wondering if there would be any nicer way to write this,
like (very prototype and wrong)
static void stg(void *dst, unsigned long src)
{
asm volatile("stg %r3,0(%r2)\n");
}
static void mvc_8(void *dst, void *src)
{
asm volatile("mvc 0(8,%r2),0(%r3)\n");
}
Please ignore if that just doesn't make any sense.
Nothing else jumped at me :)
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
2021-08-05 9:37 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2021-08-05 9:57 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-05 10:01 ` David Hildenbrand
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-08-05 9:57 UTC (permalink / raw
To: David Hildenbrand, Thomas Huth, Richard Henderson, Laurent Vivier,
Cornelia Huck
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, Christian Borntraeger, qemu-devel,
Ulrich Weigand, qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel
On Thu, 2021-08-05 at 11:37 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 05.08.21 00:51, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> > Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported
> > correctly
> > and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >
> > v7:
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
> > v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
> > 50e36dd61652.
> >
> > tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 17 +-
> > tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py | 76 ++++++++
> > tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c | 165
> > ++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> > create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> > b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> > index bd084c7840..cc64dd32d2 100644
> > --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> > @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
> > -VPATH+=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
> > +S390X_SRC=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
> > +VPATH+=$(S390X_SRC)
> > CFLAGS+=-march=zEC12 -m64
> > TESTS+=hello-s390x
> > TESTS+=csst
> > @@ -9,3 +10,17 @@ TESTS+=pack
> > TESTS+=mvo
> > TESTS+=mvc
> > TESTS+=trap
> > +TESTS+=signals-s390x
> > +
> > +ifneq ($(HAVE_GDB_BIN),)
> > +GDB_SCRIPT=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
> > +
> > +run-gdbstub-signals-s390x: signals-s390x
> > + $(call run-test, $@, $(GDB_SCRIPT) \
> > + --gdb $(HAVE_GDB_BIN) \
> > + --qemu $(QEMU) --qargs "$(QEMU_OPTS)" \
> > + --bin $< --test $(S390X_SRC)/gdbstub/test-signals-
> > s390x.py, \
> > + "mixing signals and debugging on s390x")
> > +
> > +EXTRA_RUNS += run-gdbstub-signals-s390x
> > +endif
> > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> > b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..80a284b475
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> > @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
> > +from __future__ import print_function
> > +
> > +#
> > +# Test that signals and debugging mix well together on s390x.
> > +#
> > +# This is launched via tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
> > +#
> > +
> > +import gdb
> > +import sys
> > +
> > +failcount = 0
> > +
> > +
> > +def report(cond, msg):
> > + """Report success/fail of test"""
> > + if cond:
> > + print("PASS: %s" % (msg))
> > + else:
> > + print("FAIL: %s" % (msg))
> > + global failcount
> > + failcount += 1
> > +
> > +
> > +def run_test():
> > + """Run through the tests one by one"""
> > + illegal_op = gdb.Breakpoint("illegal_op")
> > + stg = gdb.Breakpoint("stg")
> > + mvc_8 = gdb.Breakpoint("mvc_8")
> > +
> > + # Expect the following events:
> > + # 1x illegal_op breakpoint
> > + # 2x stg breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
> > + # 2x mvc_8 breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
> > + for _ in range(14):
>
> How do we come up with the value 14?
1 (initial) + 1 (illegal op) + 2 * 3 (stg) + 2 * 3 (mvc_8).
>
> > + gdb.execute("c")
> > + report(illegal_op.hit_count == 1, "illegal_op.hit_count == 1")
> > + report(stg.hit_count == 4, "stg.hit_count == 4")
>
> The doc above says we should see this twice, why do we see it 4
> times?
With "2x stg breakpoint, segv, breakpoint" I meant: stg break, stg
segv, stg break, stg break, stg segv, stg break.
> > + report(mvc_8.hit_count == 4, "mvc_8.hit_count == 4")
> > +
>
> Dito
>
> [...]
>
> > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> > b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..dc2f8ee59a
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
> > +#include <assert.h>
> > +#include <signal.h>
> > +#include <string.h>
> > +#include <sys/mman.h>
> > +#include <ucontext.h>
> > +#include <unistd.h>
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Various instructions that generate SIGILL and SIGSEGV. They
> > could have been
> > + * defined in a separate .s file, but this would complicate the
> > build, so the
> > + * inline asm is used instead.
> > + */
> > +
> > +void illegal_op(void);
> > +void after_illegal_op(void);
> > +asm(".globl\tillegal_op\n"
> > + "illegal_op:\t.byte\t0x00,0x00\n"
> > + "\t.globl\tafter_illegal_op\n"
> > + "after_illegal_op:\tbr\t%r14");
> > +
> > +void stg(void *dst, unsigned long src);
> > +asm(".globl\tstg\n"
> > + "stg:\tstg\t%r3,0(%r2)\n"
> > + "\tbr\t%r14");
> > +
> > +void mvc_8(void *dst, void *src);
> > +asm(".globl\tmvc_8\n"
> > + "mvc_8:\tmvc\t0(8,%r2),0(%r3)\n"
> > + "\tbr\t%r14");
>
> I was wondering if there would be any nicer way to write this,
> like (very prototype and wrong)
>
>
> static void stg(void *dst, unsigned long src)
> {
> asm volatile("stg %r3,0(%r2)\n");
> }
>
> static void mvc_8(void *dst, void *src)
> {
> asm volatile("mvc 0(8,%r2),0(%r3)\n");
> }
The prologue would get in the way, and I don't think gcc has
__attribute__((naked)) for s390.
> Please ignore if that just doesn't make any sense.
>
> Nothing else jumped at me :)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
2021-08-05 9:57 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
@ 2021-08-05 10:01 ` David Hildenbrand
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2021-08-05 10:01 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Ilya Leoshkevich, Thomas Huth, Richard Henderson, Laurent Vivier,
Cornelia Huck
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, Christian Borntraeger, qemu-devel,
Ulrich Weigand, qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel
On 05.08.21 11:57, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-08-05 at 11:37 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 05.08.21 00:51, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
>>> Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported
>>> correctly
>>> and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> v7:
>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
>>> v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
>>> 50e36dd61652.
>>>
>>> tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 17 +-
>>> tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py | 76 ++++++++
>>> tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c | 165
>>> ++++++++++++++++++
>>> 3 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
>>> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
>>> b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
>>> index bd084c7840..cc64dd32d2 100644
>>> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
>>> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
>>> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
>>> -VPATH+=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
>>> +S390X_SRC=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
>>> +VPATH+=$(S390X_SRC)
>>> CFLAGS+=-march=zEC12 -m64
>>> TESTS+=hello-s390x
>>> TESTS+=csst
>>> @@ -9,3 +10,17 @@ TESTS+=pack
>>> TESTS+=mvo
>>> TESTS+=mvc
>>> TESTS+=trap
>>> +TESTS+=signals-s390x
>>> +
>>> +ifneq ($(HAVE_GDB_BIN),)
>>> +GDB_SCRIPT=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
>>> +
>>> +run-gdbstub-signals-s390x: signals-s390x
>>> + $(call run-test, $@, $(GDB_SCRIPT) \
>>> + --gdb $(HAVE_GDB_BIN) \
>>> + --qemu $(QEMU) --qargs "$(QEMU_OPTS)" \
>>> + --bin $< --test $(S390X_SRC)/gdbstub/test-signals-
>>> s390x.py, \
>>> + "mixing signals and debugging on s390x")
>>> +
>>> +EXTRA_RUNS += run-gdbstub-signals-s390x
>>> +endif
>>> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
>>> b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000000..80a284b475
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
>>> +from __future__ import print_function
>>> +
>>> +#
>>> +# Test that signals and debugging mix well together on s390x.
>>> +#
>>> +# This is launched via tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
>>> +#
>>> +
>>> +import gdb
>>> +import sys
>>> +
>>> +failcount = 0
>>> +
>>> +
>>> +def report(cond, msg):
>>> + """Report success/fail of test"""
>>> + if cond:
>>> + print("PASS: %s" % (msg))
>>> + else:
>>> + print("FAIL: %s" % (msg))
>>> + global failcount
>>> + failcount += 1
>>> +
>>> +
>>> +def run_test():
>>> + """Run through the tests one by one"""
>>> + illegal_op = gdb.Breakpoint("illegal_op")
>>> + stg = gdb.Breakpoint("stg")
>>> + mvc_8 = gdb.Breakpoint("mvc_8")
>>> +
>>> + # Expect the following events:
>>> + # 1x illegal_op breakpoint
>>> + # 2x stg breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
>>> + # 2x mvc_8 breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
>>> + for _ in range(14):
>>
>> How do we come up with the value 14?
>
> 1 (initial) + 1 (illegal op) + 2 * 3 (stg) + 2 * 3 (mvc_8).
>
Oh, that makes sense.
>>
>>> + gdb.execute("c")
>>> + report(illegal_op.hit_count == 1, "illegal_op.hit_count == 1")
>>> + report(stg.hit_count == 4, "stg.hit_count == 4")
>>
>> The doc above says we should see this twice, why do we see it 4
>> times?
>
> With "2x stg breakpoint, segv, breakpoint" I meant: stg break, stg
> segv, stg break, stg break, stg segv, stg break.
Understand it now, wasn't paying attention to the details :)
Thanks!
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
2021-08-04 22:51 [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-05 9:37 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2021-08-06 5:25 ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-06 9:40 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-06 14:33 ` Alex Bennée
2021-08-10 12:24 ` Cornelia Huck
3 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Huth @ 2021-08-06 5:25 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Ilya Leoshkevich, Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand,
Laurent Vivier, Cornelia Huck
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, Ulrich Weigand, qemu-devel,
Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel
On 05/08/2021 00.51, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported correctly
> and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> v7: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
> v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
> 50e36dd61652.
Thanks for respinning this patch! I now gave it a try, and it seems to work,
but the output looks a little funny:
SKIPPED signals on s390x because BROKEN awaiting sigframe clean-ups and
vdso support
TEST test-mmap (default) on s390x
TEST testthread on s390x
TEST threadcount on s390x
TEST hello-s390x on s390x
TEST csst on s390x
TEST ipm on s390x
TEST exrl-trt on s390x
TEST exrl-trtr on s390x
TEST pack on s390x
TEST mvo on s390x
TEST mvc on s390x
TEST trap on s390x
TEST signals-s390x on s390x
i.e. it first says "SKIPPED signals", but later still executes the test.
Could that be fixed somehow?
Thomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
2021-08-06 5:25 ` Thomas Huth
@ 2021-08-06 9:40 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-08-06 9:40 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Thomas Huth, Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier,
Cornelia Huck
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, Ulrich Weigand, qemu-devel,
Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel
On Fri, 2021-08-06 at 07:25 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 05/08/2021 00.51, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> > Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported
> > correctly
> > and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >
> > v7:
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
> > v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
> > 50e36dd61652.
>
> Thanks for respinning this patch! I now gave it a try, and it seems
> to work,
> but the output looks a little funny:
>
> SKIPPED signals on s390x because BROKEN awaiting sigframe clean-
> ups and
> vdso support
> TEST test-mmap (default) on s390x
> TEST testthread on s390x
> TEST threadcount on s390x
> TEST hello-s390x on s390x
> TEST csst on s390x
> TEST ipm on s390x
> TEST exrl-trt on s390x
> TEST exrl-trtr on s390x
> TEST pack on s390x
> TEST mvo on s390x
> TEST mvc on s390x
> TEST trap on s390x
> TEST signals-s390x on s390x
>
> i.e. it first says "SKIPPED signals", but later still executes the
> test.
> Could that be fixed somehow?
These are two different tests actually. signals is a multiarch
test that is valid on other machines as well. The new signals-s390x
tests only s390x-specific aspects of signal handling.
Best regards,
Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
2021-08-04 22:51 [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-05 9:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-08-06 5:25 ` Thomas Huth
@ 2021-08-06 14:33 ` Alex Bennée
2021-08-10 12:24 ` Cornelia Huck
3 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Alex Bennée @ 2021-08-06 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Ilya Leoshkevich
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, David Hildenbrand, qemu-devel, Cornelia Huck,
Richard Henderson, Thomas Huth, Laurent Vivier, Ulrich Weigand,
qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel, Christian Borntraeger
Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> writes:
> Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported correctly
> and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> ---
>
> v7: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
> v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
> 50e36dd61652.
>
> tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 17 +-
> tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py | 76 ++++++++
> tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
>
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> index bd084c7840..cc64dd32d2 100644
> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
> -VPATH+=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
> +S390X_SRC=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/s390x
> +VPATH+=$(S390X_SRC)
> CFLAGS+=-march=zEC12 -m64
> TESTS+=hello-s390x
> TESTS+=csst
> @@ -9,3 +10,17 @@ TESTS+=pack
> TESTS+=mvo
> TESTS+=mvc
> TESTS+=trap
> +TESTS+=signals-s390x
> +
> +ifneq ($(HAVE_GDB_BIN),)
> +GDB_SCRIPT=$(SRC_PATH)/tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
> +
> +run-gdbstub-signals-s390x: signals-s390x
> + $(call run-test, $@, $(GDB_SCRIPT) \
> + --gdb $(HAVE_GDB_BIN) \
> + --qemu $(QEMU) --qargs "$(QEMU_OPTS)" \
> + --bin $< --test $(S390X_SRC)/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py, \
> + "mixing signals and debugging on s390x")
> +
> +EXTRA_RUNS += run-gdbstub-signals-s390x
> +endif
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..80a284b475
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
> +from __future__ import print_function
> +
> +#
> +# Test that signals and debugging mix well together on s390x.
> +#
> +# This is launched via tests/guest-debug/run-test.py
> +#
> +
> +import gdb
> +import sys
> +
> +failcount = 0
> +
> +
> +def report(cond, msg):
> + """Report success/fail of test"""
> + if cond:
> + print("PASS: %s" % (msg))
> + else:
> + print("FAIL: %s" % (msg))
> + global failcount
> + failcount += 1
> +
> +
> +def run_test():
> + """Run through the tests one by one"""
> + illegal_op = gdb.Breakpoint("illegal_op")
> + stg = gdb.Breakpoint("stg")
> + mvc_8 = gdb.Breakpoint("mvc_8")
> +
> + # Expect the following events:
> + # 1x illegal_op breakpoint
> + # 2x stg breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
> + # 2x mvc_8 breakpoint, segv, breakpoint
> + for _ in range(14):
> + gdb.execute("c")
> + report(illegal_op.hit_count == 1, "illegal_op.hit_count == 1")
> + report(stg.hit_count == 4, "stg.hit_count == 4")
> + report(mvc_8.hit_count == 4, "mvc_8.hit_count == 4")
> +
> + # The test must succeed.
> + gdb.Breakpoint("_exit")
> + gdb.execute("c")
> + status = int(gdb.parse_and_eval("$r2"))
> + report(status == 0, "status == 0");
> +
> +
> +#
> +# This runs as the script it sourced (via -x, via run-test.py)
> +#
> +try:
> + inferior = gdb.selected_inferior()
> + arch = inferior.architecture()
> + print("ATTACHED: %s" % arch.name())
> +except (gdb.error, AttributeError):
> + print("SKIPPING (not connected)", file=sys.stderr)
> + exit(0)
> +
> +if gdb.parse_and_eval("$pc") == 0:
> + print("SKIP: PC not set")
> + exit(0)
> +
> +try:
> + # These are not very useful in scripts
> + gdb.execute("set pagination off")
> + gdb.execute("set confirm off")
> +
> + # Run the actual tests
> + run_test()
> +except (gdb.error):
> + print("GDB Exception: %s" % (sys.exc_info()[0]))
> + failcount += 1
> + pass
> +
> +print("All tests complete: %d failures" % failcount)
> +exit(failcount)
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..dc2f8ee59a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
> +#include <assert.h>
> +#include <signal.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +#include <sys/mman.h>
> +#include <ucontext.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * Various instructions that generate SIGILL and SIGSEGV. They could have been
> + * defined in a separate .s file, but this would complicate the build, so the
> + * inline asm is used instead.
> + */
> +
> +void illegal_op(void);
> +void after_illegal_op(void);
> +asm(".globl\tillegal_op\n"
> + "illegal_op:\t.byte\t0x00,0x00\n"
> + "\t.globl\tafter_illegal_op\n"
> + "after_illegal_op:\tbr\t%r14");
> +
> +void stg(void *dst, unsigned long src);
> +asm(".globl\tstg\n"
> + "stg:\tstg\t%r3,0(%r2)\n"
> + "\tbr\t%r14");
> +
> +void mvc_8(void *dst, void *src);
> +asm(".globl\tmvc_8\n"
> + "mvc_8:\tmvc\t0(8,%r2),0(%r3)\n"
> + "\tbr\t%r14");
> +
> +static void safe_puts(const char *s)
> +{
> + write(0, s, strlen(s));
> + write(0, "\n", 1);
> +}
> +
> +enum exception {
> + exception_operation,
> + exception_translation,
> + exception_protection,
> +};
> +
> +static struct {
> + int sig;
> + void *addr;
> + unsigned long psw_addr;
> + enum exception exception;
> +} expected;
> +
> +static void handle_signal(int sig, siginfo_t *info, void *ucontext)
> +{
> + void *page;
> + int err;
> +
> + if (sig != expected.sig) {
> + safe_puts("[ FAILED ] wrong signal");
> + _exit(1);
> + }
> +
> + if (info->si_addr != expected.addr) {
> + safe_puts("[ FAILED ] wrong si_addr");
> + _exit(1);
> + }
> +
> + if (((ucontext_t *)ucontext)->uc_mcontext.psw.addr != expected.psw_addr) {
> + safe_puts("[ FAILED ] wrong psw.addr");
> + _exit(1);
> + }
> +
> + switch (expected.exception) {
> + case exception_translation:
> + page = mmap(expected.addr, 4096, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_FIXED, -1, 0);
> + if (page != expected.addr) {
> + safe_puts("[ FAILED ] mmap() failed");
> + _exit(1);
> + }
> + break;
> + case exception_protection:
> + err = mprotect(expected.addr, 4096, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE);
> + if (err != 0) {
> + safe_puts("[ FAILED ] mprotect() failed");
> + _exit(1);
> + }
> + break;
> + default:
> + break;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static void check_sigsegv(void *func, enum exception exception,
> + unsigned long val)
> +{
> + int prot;
> + unsigned long *page;
> + unsigned long *addr;
> + int err;
> +
> + prot = exception == exception_translation ? PROT_NONE : PROT_READ;
> + page = mmap(NULL, 4096, prot, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
> + assert(page != MAP_FAILED);
> + if (exception == exception_translation) {
> + /* Hopefully nothing will be mapped at this address. */
> + err = munmap(page, 4096);
> + assert(err == 0);
> + }
> + addr = page + (val & 0x1ff);
> +
> + expected.sig = SIGSEGV;
> + expected.addr = page;
> + expected.psw_addr = (unsigned long)func;
> + expected.exception = exception;
> + if (func == stg) {
> + stg(addr, val);
> + } else {
> + assert(func == mvc_8);
> + mvc_8(addr, &val);
> + }
> + assert(*addr == val);
> +
> + err = munmap(page, 4096);
> + assert(err == 0);
> +}
> +
> +int main(void)
> +{
> + struct sigaction act;
> + int err;
> +
> + memset(&act, 0, sizeof(act));
> + act.sa_sigaction = handle_signal;
> + act.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO;
> + err = sigaction(SIGILL, &act, NULL);
> + assert(err == 0);
> + err = sigaction(SIGSEGV, &act, NULL);
> + assert(err == 0);
> +
> + safe_puts("[ RUN ] Operation exception");
> + expected.sig = SIGILL;
> + expected.addr = illegal_op;
> + expected.psw_addr = (unsigned long)after_illegal_op;
> + expected.exception = exception_operation;
> + illegal_op();
> + safe_puts("[ OK ]");
> +
> + safe_puts("[ RUN ] Translation exception from stg");
> + check_sigsegv(stg, exception_translation, 42);
> + safe_puts("[ OK ]");
> +
> + safe_puts("[ RUN ] Translation exception from mvc");
> + check_sigsegv(mvc_8, exception_translation, 4242);
> + safe_puts("[ OK ]");
> +
> + safe_puts("[ RUN ] Protection exception from stg");
> + check_sigsegv(stg, exception_protection, 424242);
> + safe_puts("[ OK ]");
> +
> + safe_puts("[ RUN ] Protection exception from mvc");
> + check_sigsegv(mvc_8, exception_protection, 42424242);
> + safe_puts("[ OK ]");
> +
> + safe_puts("[ PASSED ]");
> +
> + _exit(0);
> +}
--
Alex Bennée
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
2021-08-04 22:51 [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling Ilya Leoshkevich
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-08-06 14:33 ` Alex Bennée
@ 2021-08-10 12:24 ` Cornelia Huck
3 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Cornelia Huck @ 2021-08-10 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Ilya Leoshkevich, Thomas Huth, Richard Henderson,
David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier
Cc: jonathan . albrecht, Ilya Leoshkevich, Ulrich Weigand, qemu-devel,
Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, Andreas Krebbel
On Thu, Aug 05 2021, Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported correctly
> and that signal handling interacts properly with debugging.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> v7: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg00463.html
> v7 -> v8: Another rebase needed due to the conflict with Jonathan's
> 50e36dd61652.
>
> tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 17 +-
> tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py | 76 ++++++++
> tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/gdbstub/test-signals-s390x.py
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/signals-s390x.c
Thanks, applied.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-08-10 12:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-08-04 22:51 [PATCH v8] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-05 9:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-08-05 9:57 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-05 10:01 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-08-06 5:25 ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-06 9:40 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-08-06 14:33 ` Alex Bennée
2021-08-10 12:24 ` Cornelia Huck
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.