Re: [RFC PATCH v11 28/29] KVM: selftests: Add basic selftest for guest_memfd()
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Date: 2023-08-18 23:02:24
Also in:
kvm, kvm-riscv, kvmarm, linux-arm-kernel, linux-fsdevel, linux-mips, linux-mm, linux-riscv, linuxppc-dev, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2023-08-21 · Re: [RFC PATCH v11 28/29] KVM: selftests: Add basic selftest for guest_memfd() · Ackerley Tng <hidden>
- 2023-08-18 · Re: [RFC PATCH v11 28/29] KVM: selftests: Add basic selftest for guest_memfd() · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
- 2023-08-07 · Re: [RFC PATCH v11 28/29] KVM: selftests: Add basic selftest for guest_memfd() · Ackerley Tng <hidden>
- 2023-07-18 · [RFC PATCH v11 28/29] KVM: selftests: Add basic selftest for guest_memfd() · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
On Mon, Aug 07, 2023, Ackerley Tng wrote:
Sean Christopherson [off-list ref] writes:quoted
Add a selftest to verify the basic functionality of guest_memfd(): <snip>Here's one more test:
First off, thank you! I greatly appreciate all the selftests work you (and others!) have been doing. For v2, can you please post a standalone patch? My workflow barfs on unrelated, inlined patches. I'm guessing I can get b4 to play nice, but it's easier to just yell at people :-)
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
quoted
From 72dc6836f01bdd613d64d4c6a4f2af8f2b777ba2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001From: Ackerley Tng <redacted> Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2023 18:02:50 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] KVM: selftests: Add tests - invalid inputs for KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD Test that invalid inputs for KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD, such as non-page-aligned page size and invalid flags, are rejected by the KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD with EINVAL Signed-off-by: Ackerley Tng <redacted> --- tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ .../selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util_base.h | 11 +++++++++-- 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c index eb93c608a7e0..ad20f11b2d2c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/guest_memfd_test.c@@ -90,6 +90,21 @@ static void test_fallocate(int fd, size_t page_size, size_t total_size) TEST_ASSERT(!ret, "fallocate to restore punched hole should succeed"); } +static void test_create_guest_memfd_invalid(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t page_size) +{ + int fd; + + /* Non-page-aligned page_size */
Instead of adding a comment, use the message from TEST_ASSERT() to communicate that information to the reader *and* to anyone that encounters failures.
+ fd = __vm_create_guest_memfd(vm, 1, 0);
ioctls() are fast. Rather than hardcode one value, iterate over a range of
values, e.g.
for (size = 0; size < page_size; size++) {
r = __vm_create_guest_memfd(vm, size, 0);
TEST_ASSERT(r && errno == EINVAL,
"Informative error message...);
}
+ ASSERT_EQ(errno, EINVAL); + + /* Invalid flags */ + fd = __vm_create_guest_memfd(vm, page_size, 99); + ASSERT_EQ(fd, -1); + ASSERT_EQ(errno, EINVAL);
And then same thing here. Then you can use the legal flags to determine what is and isn't valid, instead of using a completely arbitrary magic number.