From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: vDSO: Do not rely on $ARCH for vdso_test_getrandom && vdso_test_chacha
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2024 16:23:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2367d530-9a63-4acc-aa92-cc443477ca2c@csgroup.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cae4fb76-224e-4858-a44a-1ebb71c25821@csgroup.eu>
Le 02/09/2024 à 16:18, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
>
>
> Le 02/09/2024 à 15:57, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
>> On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 03:23:47PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 02/09/2024 à 14:37, Mark Brown a écrit :
>>>> On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 02:22:38PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When vdso_test_getcpu doesn't find the vDSO entry point, it prints
>>>>> an error
>>>>> text and returns KSFT_SKIP
>>>>
>>>>> I thought it would be more correct to have the same behaviour on
>>>>> vdso_test_getrandom instead of trying to build it only when the
>>>>> underlying
>>>>> kernel supports it.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that the test incorporates assembler code so it simply
>>>> won't build for architectures without explicit porting, the issue isn't
>>>> if the target kernel supports it but rather that the test won't compile
>>>> in the first place.
>>>
>>> Yes indeed and that was the purpose of my patch, have a macro in
>>> vdso_config.h to tell where the assembler code is:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/vdso_config.h
>>> b/tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/vdso_config.h
>>> index 740ce8c98d2e..693920471160 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/vdso_config.h
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/vdso_config.h
>>> @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
>>> #elif defined(__x86_64__)
>>> #define VDSO_VERSION 0
>>> #define VDSO_NAMES 1
>>> +#define VDSO_GETRANDOM
>>> "../../../../arch/x86/entry/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S"
>>> #elif defined(__riscv__) || defined(__riscv)
>>> #define VDSO_VERSION 5
>>> #define VDSO_NAMES 1
>>>
>>>
>>> And then:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/vdso_test_chacha-asm.S
>>> b/tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/vdso_test_chacha-asm.S
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..8e704165f6f2
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/vdso_test_chacha-asm.S
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
>>> +#include "vdso_config.h"
>>> +
>>> +#ifdef VDSO_GETRANDOM
>>> +
>>> +#include VDSO_GETRANDOM
>>> +
>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> I thought it was a lot easier to handle if through necessary #ifdefs in
>>> vdso_config.h that implementing an additional logic in Makefiles.
>>
>> Yet it still tripped up the test robot, right?
>
> Yes I need to look at that.
>
>>
>> In general I'm not crazy about this approach.
>
> I have the feeling I get things done easier with that approach. But if
> you feel better playing up with the makefile, I incline.
Also I thing that one day or another someone will want to implement it a
more performant way on power10 which is one of the latest powerpc CPU,
something similar to arch/powerpc/crypto/chacha-p10le-8x.S
When that happens, we will need a way to tell vdso_test_chacha to build
another vgetrandom-chacha.S and I feel that doing it in the Makefile
will become really tricky.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-02 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-31 17:11 Christophe Leroy
2024-09-01 13:22 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-09-01 18:00 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-01 18:02 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-09-01 18:43 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-02 1:20 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-09-02 12:39 ` LEROY Christophe
2024-09-02 12:43 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-09-02 12:22 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-02 12:37 ` Mark Brown
2024-09-02 13:23 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-02 13:57 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-09-02 14:18 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-02 14:23 ` Christophe Leroy [this message]
2024-11-07 8:40 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-09-01 13:27 ` kernel test robot
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=2367d530-9a63-4acc-aa92-cc443477ca2c@csgroup.eu \
--to=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xry111@xry111.site \
/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®