Transactional Memory was removed from the architecture in ISA v3.1. For
threads running in P8/P9 compatibility mode on P10 a synthetic TM
implementation is provided. In this implementation, tbegin. always sets
cr0 eq meaning the abort handler is always called. This is not an issue
as users of TM are expected to have a fallback non transactional way to
make forward progress in the abort handler. The TEXASR indicates if a
transaction failure is due to a synthetic implementation.
Some of the TM self tests need a non-degenerate TM implementation for
their testing to be meaningful so check for a synthetic implementation
and skip the test if so.
Signed-off-by: Jordan Niethe <jniethe5@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210729041317.366612-2-jniethe5@gmail.com
This test triggers a TM Bad Thing by raising a signal in transactional state
and forcing a pagefault to happen in kernelspace when the kernel signal
handling code first touches the user signal stack.
This is inspired by the test tm-signal-context-force-tm but uses userfaultfd to
make the test deterministic. While this test always triggers the bug in one
run, I had to execute tm-signal-context-force-tm several times (the test runs
5000 times each execution) to trigger the same bug.
tm-signal-context-force-tm is kept instead of replaced because, while this test
is more reliable and triggers the same bug, tm-signal-context-force-tm has a
better coverage, in the sense that by running the test several times it might
trigger the pagefault and/or be preempted at different places.
v3: skip test if userfaultfd is unavailable.
Signed-off-by: Gustavo Luiz Duarte <gustavold@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200211033831.11165-2-gustavold@linux.ibm.com
Jordan Niethe