From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (gregkh at linuxfoundation.org) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 12:07:43 +0200 Subject: Patch "bpf, arm32: fix inconsistent naming about emit_a32_lsr_{r64, i64}" has been added to the 4.17-stable tree Message-ID: <1532772463049@kroah.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled bpf, arm32: fix inconsistent naming about emit_a32_lsr_{r64,i64} to the 4.17-stable tree which can be found at: http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary The filename of the patch is: bpf-arm32-fix-inconsistent-naming-about-emit_a32_lsr_-r64-i64.patch and it can be found in the queue-4.17 subdirectory. If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let know about it. >>From foo at baz Sat Jul 28 10:14:30 CEST 2018 From: Wang YanQing Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 10:52:17 +0800 Subject: bpf, arm32: fix inconsistent naming about emit_a32_lsr_{r64,i64} From: Wang YanQing [ Upstream commit 68565a1af9f7012e6f2fe2bdd612f67d2d830c28 ] The names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH are emit_a32_arsh_*, the names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH are emit_a32_lsh_*, but the names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH are emit_a32_lsr_*. For consistence reason, let's rename emit_a32_lsr_* to emit_a32_rsh_*. This patch also corrects a wrong comment. Fixes: 39c13c204bb1 ("arm: eBPF JIT compiler") Signed-off-by: Wang YanQing Cc: Shubham Bansal Cc: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org Cc: linux at armlinux.org.uk Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) --- a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c +++ b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c @@ -708,7 +708,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_arsh_r64(con } /* dst = dst >> src */ -static inline void emit_a32_lsr_r64(const u8 dst[], const u8 src[], bool dstk, +static inline void emit_a32_rsh_r64(const u8 dst[], const u8 src[], bool dstk, bool sstk, struct jit_ctx *ctx) { const u8 *tmp = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_1]; const u8 *tmp2 = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_2]; @@ -724,7 +724,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_lsr_r64(cons emit(ARM_LDR_I(rm, ARM_SP, STACK_VAR(dst_hi)), ctx); } - /* Do LSH operation */ + /* Do RSH operation */ emit(ARM_RSB_I(ARM_IP, rt, 32), ctx); emit(ARM_SUBS_I(tmp2[0], rt, 32), ctx); emit(ARM_MOV_SR(ARM_LR, rd, SRTYPE_LSR, rt), ctx); @@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_lsh_i64(cons } /* dst = dst >> val */ -static inline void emit_a32_lsr_i64(const u8 dst[], bool dstk, +static inline void emit_a32_rsh_i64(const u8 dst[], bool dstk, const u32 val, struct jit_ctx *ctx) { const u8 *tmp = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_1]; const u8 *tmp2 = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_2]; @@ -1330,7 +1330,7 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_i case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_K: if (unlikely(imm > 63)) return -EINVAL; - emit_a32_lsr_i64(dst, dstk, imm, ctx); + emit_a32_rsh_i64(dst, dstk, imm, ctx); break; /* dst = dst << src */ case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_X: @@ -1338,7 +1338,7 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_i break; /* dst = dst >> src */ case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_X: - emit_a32_lsr_r64(dst, src, dstk, sstk, ctx); + emit_a32_rsh_r64(dst, src, dstk, sstk, ctx); break; /* dst = dst >> src (signed) */ case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X: Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from udknight at gmail.com are queue-4.17/bpf-arm32-fix-inconsistent-naming-about-emit_a32_lsr_-r64-i64.patch