mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
	 Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,  Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>
Cc: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,  kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org,  linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,  Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	"Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" <ljs@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v8 1/3] KVM: selftests: arm64: Report set_id_reg reads of test registers as tests
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 17:16:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260929-kvm-arm64-set-id-regs-aarch64-v8-1-58aabe2c2fac@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260929-kvm-arm64-set-id-regs-aarch64-v8-0-58aabe2c2fac@kernel.org>

Currently when we run guest code to validate that the values we wrote to
the registers are seen by the guest we assert that these values match using
a KVM selftests level assert, resulting in unclear diagnostics if the test
fails. Replace this assert with reporting a kselftest test per register.

In order to support getting the names of the registers we repaint the array
of ID_ registers to store the names and open code the rest.

Reviewed-by: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) <ljs@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c | 82 +++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c
index 7429a1055df5..db6414a93ad3 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/arm64/set_id_regs.c
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ struct reg_ftr_bits {
 };
 
 struct test_feature_reg {
+	const char *name;
 	u32 reg;
 	const struct reg_ftr_bits *ftr_bits;
 };
@@ -227,30 +228,32 @@ static const struct reg_ftr_bits ftr_id_aa64zfr0_el1[] = {
 
 #define TEST_REG(id, table)			\
 	{					\
-		.reg = id,			\
+		.name = #id,			\
+		.reg = SYS_ ## id,		\
 		.ftr_bits = &((table)[0]),	\
 	}
 
 static struct test_feature_reg test_regs[] = {
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64DFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64dfr0_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_DFR0_EL1, ftr_id_dfr0_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar0_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64ISAR1_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar1_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64ISAR2_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar2_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64ISAR3_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar3_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64pfr0_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1, ftr_id_aa64pfr1_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr0_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr1_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64MMFR2_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr2_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64MMFR3_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr3_el1),
-	TEST_REG(SYS_ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64zfr0_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64DFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64dfr0_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_DFR0_EL1, ftr_id_dfr0_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar0_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64ISAR1_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar1_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64ISAR2_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar2_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64ISAR3_EL1, ftr_id_aa64isar3_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64pfr0_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64PFR1_EL1, ftr_id_aa64pfr1_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr0_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr1_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64MMFR2_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr2_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64MMFR3_EL1, ftr_id_aa64mmfr3_el1),
+	TEST_REG(ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1, ftr_id_aa64zfr0_el1),
 };
 
 #define GUEST_REG_SYNC(id) GUEST_SYNC_ARGS(0, id, read_sysreg_s(id), 0, 0);
 
 static void guest_code(void)
 {
+	/* Registers in test_regs array */
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_ID_AA64DFR0_EL1);
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_ID_DFR0_EL1);
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1);
@@ -264,6 +267,8 @@ static void guest_code(void)
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_ID_AA64MMFR2_EL1);
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_ID_AA64MMFR3_EL1);
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1);
+
+	/* Additional registers counted in NUM_EXTRA_REGS */
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_MPIDR_EL1);
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_CLIDR_EL1);
 	GUEST_REG_SYNC(SYS_CTR_EL0);
@@ -274,6 +279,35 @@ static void guest_code(void)
 	GUEST_DONE();
 }
 
+#define NUM_EXTRA_REGS 6
+#define GUEST_READ_TEST (ARRAY_SIZE(test_regs) + NUM_EXTRA_REGS)
+
+static const char *get_reg_name(u64 id)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_regs); i++)
+		if (test_regs[i].reg == id)
+			return test_regs[i].name;
+
+	switch (id) {
+	case SYS_MPIDR_EL1:
+		return "MPIDR_EL1";
+	case SYS_CLIDR_EL1:
+		return "CLIDR_EL1";
+	case SYS_CTR_EL0:
+		return "CTR_EL0";
+	case SYS_MIDR_EL1:
+		return "MIDR_EL1";
+	case SYS_REVIDR_EL1:
+		return "REVIDR_EL1";
+	case SYS_AIDR_EL1:
+		return "AIDR_EL1";
+	default:
+		TEST_FAIL("Unknown register");
+	}
+}
+
 /* Return a safe value to a given ftr_bits an ftr value */
 u64 get_safe_value(const struct reg_ftr_bits *ftr_bits, u64 ftr)
 {
@@ -674,7 +708,8 @@ static void test_guest_reg_read(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	struct ucall uc;
 
 	while (!done) {
-		u64 val;
+		u64 reg_id, expected_val, guest_val;
+		bool match;
 
 		vcpu_run(vcpu);
 
@@ -683,11 +718,20 @@ static void test_guest_reg_read(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 			REPORT_GUEST_ASSERT(uc);
 			break;
 		case UCALL_SYNC:
-			val = test_reg_vals[encoding_to_range_idx(uc.args[2])];
-			val = reset_mutable_bits(uc.args[2], val);
+			expected_val = test_reg_vals[encoding_to_range_idx(uc.args[2])];
+			expected_val = reset_mutable_bits(uc.args[2], expected_val);
 
 			/* Make sure the written values are seen by guest */
-			TEST_ASSERT_EQ(val, reset_mutable_bits(uc.args[2], uc.args[3]));
+			reg_id = uc.args[2];
+			guest_val = reset_mutable_bits(uc.args[2], uc.args[3]);
+
+			match = expected_val == guest_val;
+			if (!match)
+				ksft_print_msg("%lx != %lx\n",
+					       expected_val, guest_val);
+			ksft_test_result(match,
+					 "%s value seen in guest\n",
+					 get_reg_name(reg_id));
 			break;
 		case UCALL_DONE:
 			done = true;
@@ -828,7 +872,7 @@ int main(void)
 
 	ksft_print_header();
 
-	test_cnt = 3 + MPAM_IDREG_TEST + MTE_IDREG_TEST;
+	test_cnt = 3 + MPAM_IDREG_TEST + MTE_IDREG_TEST + GUEST_READ_TEST;
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_regs); i++)
 		for (j = 0; test_regs[i].ftr_bits[j].type != FTR_END; j++)
 			test_cnt++;

-- 
2.47.3


  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-29 16:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-29 16:16 [PATCH v8 0/3] KVM: selftests: arm64: Improve diagnostics from set_id_regs Mark Brown
2026-09-29 16:16 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2026-09-29 16:16 ` [PATCH v8 2/3] KVM: selftests: arm64: Report register reset tests individually Mark Brown
2026-09-29 16:16 ` [PATCH v8 3/3] KVM: selftests: arm64: Make set_id_regs bitfield validity checks non-fatal Mark Brown
2026-10-14  7:40 ` [PATCH v8 0/3] KVM: selftests: arm64: Improve diagnostics from set_id_regs Itaru Kitayama
2026-10-14 10:32   ` Mark Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260929-kvm-arm64-set-id-regs-aarch64-v8-1-58aabe2c2fac@kernel.org \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=ben.horgan@arm.com \
    --cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=oupton@kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®