| Message ID | 20220401221014.13556-3-chang.seok.bae@intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | selftests/x86: AMX-related test improvements | expand |
On 4/1/22 4:10 PM, Chang S. Bae wrote: > When a CPU does not have AMX, the test fails. But this is wrong as it > should be runnable regardless. Skip the test instead. > > Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Fixes: 6a3e0651b4a ("selftests/x86/amx: Add test cases for AMX state management") > Signed-off-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com> > Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > --- > tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c > index 3615ef4a48bb..14abb6072a7d 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c > @@ -106,6 +106,12 @@ static void clearhandler(int sig) > > #define CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK (1 << 26) > #define CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK (1 << 27) > + > +static struct { > + unsigned xsave: 1; > + unsigned osxsave: 1; > +} cpuinfo; > + Why is this needed? Also naming this cpuinfo is confuing. > static inline void check_cpuid_xsave(void) > { > uint32_t eax, ebx, ecx, edx; > @@ -118,10 +124,8 @@ static inline void check_cpuid_xsave(void) > eax = 1; > ecx = 0; > cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx); > - if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK)) > - fatal_error("cpuid: no CPU xsave support"); > - if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK)) > - fatal_error("cpuid: no OS xsave support"); > + cpuinfo.xsave = !!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK); > + cpuinfo.osxsave = !!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK); Why add this complexity. Why not just Skip here? > } > > static uint32_t xbuf_size; > @@ -161,14 +165,31 @@ static void check_cpuid_xtiledata(void) > * eax: XTILEDATA state component size > * ebx: XTILEDATA state component offset in user buffer > */ > - if (!eax || !ebx) > - fatal_error("xstate cpuid: invalid tile data size/offset: %d/%d", > - eax, ebx); > - > xtiledata.size = eax; > xtiledata.xbuf_offset = ebx; > } > > +static bool amx_available(void) > +{ > + check_cpuid_xsave(); > + if (!cpuinfo.xsave) { > + printf("[SKIP]\tcpuid: no CPU xsave support\n"); > + return false; > + } else if (!cpuinfo.osxsave) { > + printf("[SKIP]\tcpuid: no OS xsave support\n"); > + return false; > + } > + > + check_cpuid_xtiledata(); > + if (!xtiledata.size || !xtiledata.xbuf_offset) { > + printf("[SKIP]\txstate cpuid: no tile data (size/offset: %d/%d)\n", > + xtiledata.size, xtiledata.xbuf_offset); > + return false; > + } > + > + return true; > +} > + I am not seeing any value in adding this layer of abstraction. Keep it simple and do the handling in main() > /* The helpers for managing XSAVE buffer and tile states: */ > > struct xsave_buffer *alloc_xbuf(void) > @@ -826,9 +847,8 @@ static void test_context_switch(void) > > int main(void) > { > - /* Check hardware availability at first */ > - check_cpuid_xsave(); > - check_cpuid_xtiledata(); > + if (!amx_available()) > + return 0; This should KSFT_SKIP for this to be reported as a skip. Returning 0 will be reported as a Pass. > > init_stashed_xsave(); > sethandler(SIGILL, handle_noperm, 0); > thanks, -- Shuah
On 6/16/2022 3:54 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 4/1/22 4:10 PM, Chang S. Bae wrote: >> >> + >> +static struct { >> + unsigned xsave: 1; >> + unsigned osxsave: 1; >> +} cpuinfo; >> + > > Why is this needed? Also naming this cpuinfo is confuing. This came from the below CPUID check which seems to be moot. > >> static inline void check_cpuid_xsave(void) >> { >> uint32_t eax, ebx, ecx, edx; >> @@ -118,10 +124,8 @@ static inline void check_cpuid_xsave(void) >> eax = 1; >> ecx = 0; >> cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx); >> - if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK)) >> - fatal_error("cpuid: no CPU xsave support"); >> - if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK)) >> - fatal_error("cpuid: no OS xsave support"); >> + cpuinfo.xsave = !!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK); >> + cpuinfo.osxsave = !!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK); > > Why add this complexity. Why not just Skip here? I think these CPUID checks can go away with ARCH_GET_XCOMP_SUPP. > >> } >> static uint32_t xbuf_size; >> @@ -161,14 +165,31 @@ static void check_cpuid_xtiledata(void) >> * eax: XTILEDATA state component size >> * ebx: XTILEDATA state component offset in user buffer >> */ >> - if (!eax || !ebx) >> - fatal_error("xstate cpuid: invalid tile data size/offset: >> %d/%d", >> - eax, ebx); >> - >> xtiledata.size = eax; >> xtiledata.xbuf_offset = ebx; >> } >> +static bool amx_available(void) >> +{ >> + check_cpuid_xsave(); >> + if (!cpuinfo.xsave) { >> + printf("[SKIP]\tcpuid: no CPU xsave support\n"); >> + return false; >> + } else if (!cpuinfo.osxsave) { >> + printf("[SKIP]\tcpuid: no OS xsave support\n"); >> + return false; >> + } >> + >> + check_cpuid_xtiledata(); >> + if (!xtiledata.size || !xtiledata.xbuf_offset) { >> + printf("[SKIP]\txstate cpuid: no tile data (size/offset: >> %d/%d)\n", >> + xtiledata.size, xtiledata.xbuf_offset); >> + return false; >> + } >> + >> + return true; >> +} >> + > > I am not seeing any value in adding this layer of abstraction. > Keep it simple and do the handling in main() Sure. > >> /* The helpers for managing XSAVE buffer and tile states: */ >> struct xsave_buffer *alloc_xbuf(void) >> @@ -826,9 +847,8 @@ static void test_context_switch(void) >> int main(void) >> { >> - /* Check hardware availability at first */ >> - check_cpuid_xsave(); >> - check_cpuid_xtiledata(); >> + if (!amx_available()) >> + return 0; > > This should KSFT_SKIP for this to be reported as a skip. Returning 0 > will be reported as a Pass. I think that's a good point, thanks. Now, along with the on-going documentation [1], this test code can be simplified like the below changes, instead of having those cpuid functions: diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c index 625e42901237..83705c472a5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c @@ -348,6 +348,7 @@ enum expected_result { FAIL_EXPECTED, SUCCESS_EXPECTED }; /* arch_prctl() and sigaltstack() test */ +#define ARCH_GET_XCOMP_SUPP 0x1021 #define ARCH_GET_XCOMP_PERM 0x1022 #define ARCH_REQ_XCOMP_PERM 0x1023 @@ -828,9 +829,14 @@ static void test_context_switch(void) int main(void) { - /* Check hardware availability at first */ - check_cpuid_xsave(); - check_cpuid_xtiledata(); + unsigned long features; + long rc; + + rc = syscall(SYS_arch_prctl, ARCH_GET_XCOMP_SUPP, &features); + if (rc || (features & XFEATURE_MASK_XTILE) != XFEATURE_MASK_XTILE) { + printf("[SKIP]\tno AMX support\n"); + exit(KSFT_FAIL); + } init_stashed_xsave(); sethandler(SIGILL, handle_noperm, 0); Thanks, Chang [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/86952726-53e6-17a9-dbe0-3e970c565044@intel.com/
On 6/17/22 4:21 PM, Chang S. Bae wrote: > On 6/16/2022 3:54 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 4/1/22 4:10 PM, Chang S. Bae wrote: >>> >> >> This should KSFT_SKIP for this to be reported as a skip. Returning 0 >> will be reported as a Pass. > > I think that's a good point, thanks. > > Now, along with the on-going documentation [1], this test code can be simplified like the below changes, instead of having those cpuid functions: > Simplifying is always good. Send me v2 and I will review it. thanks, -- Shuah
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c index 3615ef4a48bb..14abb6072a7d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c @@ -106,6 +106,12 @@ static void clearhandler(int sig) #define CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK (1 << 26) #define CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK (1 << 27) + +static struct { + unsigned xsave: 1; + unsigned osxsave: 1; +} cpuinfo; + static inline void check_cpuid_xsave(void) { uint32_t eax, ebx, ecx, edx; @@ -118,10 +124,8 @@ static inline void check_cpuid_xsave(void) eax = 1; ecx = 0; cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx); - if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK)) - fatal_error("cpuid: no CPU xsave support"); - if (!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK)) - fatal_error("cpuid: no OS xsave support"); + cpuinfo.xsave = !!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_XSAVE_MASK); + cpuinfo.osxsave = !!(ecx & CPUID_LEAF1_ECX_OSXSAVE_MASK); } static uint32_t xbuf_size; @@ -161,14 +165,31 @@ static void check_cpuid_xtiledata(void) * eax: XTILEDATA state component size * ebx: XTILEDATA state component offset in user buffer */ - if (!eax || !ebx) - fatal_error("xstate cpuid: invalid tile data size/offset: %d/%d", - eax, ebx); - xtiledata.size = eax; xtiledata.xbuf_offset = ebx; } +static bool amx_available(void) +{ + check_cpuid_xsave(); + if (!cpuinfo.xsave) { + printf("[SKIP]\tcpuid: no CPU xsave support\n"); + return false; + } else if (!cpuinfo.osxsave) { + printf("[SKIP]\tcpuid: no OS xsave support\n"); + return false; + } + + check_cpuid_xtiledata(); + if (!xtiledata.size || !xtiledata.xbuf_offset) { + printf("[SKIP]\txstate cpuid: no tile data (size/offset: %d/%d)\n", + xtiledata.size, xtiledata.xbuf_offset); + return false; + } + + return true; +} + /* The helpers for managing XSAVE buffer and tile states: */ struct xsave_buffer *alloc_xbuf(void) @@ -826,9 +847,8 @@ static void test_context_switch(void) int main(void) { - /* Check hardware availability at first */ - check_cpuid_xsave(); - check_cpuid_xtiledata(); + if (!amx_available()) + return 0; init_stashed_xsave(); sethandler(SIGILL, handle_noperm, 0);
When a CPU does not have AMX, the test fails. But this is wrong as it should be runnable regardless. Skip the test instead. Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Fixes: 6a3e0651b4a ("selftests/x86/amx: Add test cases for AMX state management") Signed-off-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com> Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)