Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] powerpc/code-patching: Test patch_instructions() during boot

From: Benjamin Gray <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:28:14 +1100

patch_instructions() introduces new behaviour with a couple of
variations. Test each case of

  * a repeated 32-bit instruction,
  * a repeated 64-bit instruction (ppc64), and
  * a copied sequence of instructions

for both on a single page and when it crosses a page boundary.

Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gray <[email-masked]>

---

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email-masked]/

v2: * Shrink the code array to reduce frame size. It still
      crosses a page, and 32 vs 256 words is unlikely to
      make a difference in test coverage otherwise.
---
 arch/powerpc/lib/test-code-patching.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 92 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/test-code-patching.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/test-code-patching.c
index c44823292f73..f76030087f98 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/lib/test-code-patching.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/test-code-patching.c
@@ -347,6 +347,97 @@ static void __init test_prefixed_patching(void)
 	check(!memcmp(iptr, expected, sizeof(expected)));
 }
 
+static void __init test_multi_instruction_patching(void)
+{
+	u32 code[32];
+	void *buf;
+	u32 *addr32;
+	u64 *addr64;
+	ppc_inst_t inst64 = ppc_inst_prefix(OP_PREFIX << 26 | 3UL << 24, PPC_RAW_TRAP());
+	u32 inst32 = PPC_RAW_NOP();
+
+	buf = vzalloc(PAGE_SIZE * 8);
+	check(buf);
+	if (!buf)
+		return;
+
+	/* Test single page 32-bit repeated instruction */
+	addr32 = buf + PAGE_SIZE;
+	check(!patch_instructions(addr32 + 1, &inst32, 12, true));
+
+	check(addr32[0] == 0);
+	check(addr32[1] == inst32);
+	check(addr32[2] == inst32);
+	check(addr32[3] == inst32);
+	check(addr32[4] == 0);
+
+	/* Test single page 64-bit repeated instruction */
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC64)) {
+		check(ppc_inst_prefixed(inst64));
+
+		addr64 = buf + PAGE_SIZE * 2;
+		ppc_inst_write(code, inst64);
+		check(!patch_instructions((u32 *)(addr64 + 1), code, 24, true));
+
+		check(addr64[0] == 0);
+		check(ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read((u32 *)&addr64[1]), inst64));
+		check(ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read((u32 *)&addr64[2]), inst64));
+		check(ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read((u32 *)&addr64[3]), inst64));
+		check(addr64[4] == 0);
+	}
+
+	/* Test single page memcpy */
+	addr32 = buf + PAGE_SIZE * 3;
+
+	for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(code); i++)
+		code[i] = i + 1;
+
+	check(!patch_instructions(addr32 + 1, code, sizeof(code), false));
+
+	check(addr32[0] == 0);
+	check(!memcmp(&addr32[1], code, sizeof(code)));
+	check(addr32[ARRAY_SIZE(code) + 1] == 0);
+
+	/* Test multipage 32-bit repeated instruction */
+	addr32 = buf + PAGE_SIZE * 4 - 8;
+	check(!patch_instructions(addr32 + 1, &inst32, 12, true));
+
+	check(addr32[0] == 0);
+	check(addr32[1] == inst32);
+	check(addr32[2] == inst32);
+	check(addr32[3] == inst32);
+	check(addr32[4] == 0);
+
+	/* Test multipage 64-bit repeated instruction */
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC64)) {
+		check(ppc_inst_prefixed(inst64));
+
+		addr64 = buf + PAGE_SIZE * 5 - 8;
+		ppc_inst_write(code, inst64);
+		check(!patch_instructions((u32 *)(addr64 + 1), code, 24, true));
+
+		check(addr64[0] == 0);
+		check(ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read((u32 *)&addr64[1]), inst64));
+		check(ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read((u32 *)&addr64[2]), inst64));
+		check(ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read((u32 *)&addr64[3]), inst64));
+		check(addr64[4] == 0);
+	}
+
+	/* Test multipage memcpy */
+	addr32 = buf + PAGE_SIZE * 6 - 12;
+
+	for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(code); i++)
+		code[i] = i + 1;
+
+	check(!patch_instructions(addr32 + 1, code, sizeof(code), false));
+
+	check(addr32[0] == 0);
+	check(!memcmp(&addr32[1], code, sizeof(code)));
+	check(addr32[ARRAY_SIZE(code) + 1] == 0);
+
+	vfree(buf);
+}
+
 static int __init test_code_patching(void)
 {
 	pr_info("Running code patching self-tests ...\n");
@@ -356,6 +447,7 @@ static int __init test_code_patching(void)
 	test_create_function_call();
 	test_translate_branch();
 	test_prefixed_patching();
+	test_multi_instruction_patching();
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
2.44.0