From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix signedness bug in loading 64-bit immediate
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 16:17:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150508151704.GF25587@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKU6vybvWvoF2Om0D-tPp0N-_4Oj3o44hnbmrnEtyNN8XeBAHg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:45:59AM +0100, Xi Wang wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> >> - imm64 = (u64)insn1.imm << 32 | imm;
> >> + imm64 = ((u64)(u32)insn1.imm) << 32 | (u64)(u32)imm;
> >
> > This seems a bit convoluted to me. Don't you just need to add a (u32)
> > cast to imm and that's it? The (u64)(u32) looks redundant.
>
> You're right - the second (u64) is redundant; the hope was to make
> the code easier to understand. It's from the interpreter code in
> kernel/core/bpf.c, which uses (u64)(u32) as well.
>
> >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 1),
> >> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0x1ffffffffLL),
> >> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32), /* R0 = 1 */
> >> BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> >
> > This hunk should probably be a separate patch, unless you get Alexei's ack
> > for me to take it via the arm64 tree too.
>
> I would be happy to split this into a separate patch if that works
> better, or simply drop this part.
Ok, I plan to apply the patch below for 4.1.
Will
--->8
>From 1e4df6b7208140f3c49f316d33a409d3a161f350 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 06:39:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix signedness bug in loading 64-bit immediate
Consider "(u64)insn1.imm << 32 | imm" in the arm64 JIT. Since imm is
signed 32-bit, it is sign-extended to 64-bit, losing the high 32 bits.
The fix is to convert imm to u32 first, which will be zero-extended to
u64 implicitly.
Cc: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Fixes: 30d3d94cc3d5 ("arm64: bpf: add 'load 64-bit immediate' instruction")
Signed-off-by: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
[will: removed non-arm64 bits and redundant casting]
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
---
arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index edba042b2325..dc6a4842683a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -487,7 +487,7 @@ emit_cond_jmp:
return -EINVAL;
}
- imm64 = (u64)insn1.imm << 32 | imm;
+ imm64 = (u64)insn1.imm << 32 | (u32)imm;
emit_a64_mov_i64(dst, imm64, ctx);
return 1;
--
2.1.4
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix signedness bug in loading 64-bit immediate
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 16:17:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150508151704.GF25587@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKU6vybvWvoF2Om0D-tPp0N-_4Oj3o44hnbmrnEtyNN8XeBAHg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:45:59AM +0100, Xi Wang wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> >> - imm64 = (u64)insn1.imm << 32 | imm;
> >> + imm64 = ((u64)(u32)insn1.imm) << 32 | (u64)(u32)imm;
> >
> > This seems a bit convoluted to me. Don't you just need to add a (u32)
> > cast to imm and that's it? The (u64)(u32) looks redundant.
>
> You're right - the second (u64) is redundant; the hope was to make
> the code easier to understand. It's from the interpreter code in
> kernel/core/bpf.c, which uses (u64)(u32) as well.
>
> >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 1),
> >> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0x1ffffffffLL),
> >> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32), /* R0 = 1 */
> >> BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> >
> > This hunk should probably be a separate patch, unless you get Alexei's ack
> > for me to take it via the arm64 tree too.
>
> I would be happy to split this into a separate patch if that works
> better, or simply drop this part.
Ok, I plan to apply the patch below for 4.1.
Will
--->8
>From 1e4df6b7208140f3c49f316d33a409d3a161f350 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 06:39:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix signedness bug in loading 64-bit immediate
Consider "(u64)insn1.imm << 32 | imm" in the arm64 JIT. Since imm is
signed 32-bit, it is sign-extended to 64-bit, losing the high 32 bits.
The fix is to convert imm to u32 first, which will be zero-extended to
u64 implicitly.
Cc: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Fixes: 30d3d94cc3d5 ("arm64: bpf: add 'load 64-bit immediate' instruction")
Signed-off-by: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
[will: removed non-arm64 bits and redundant casting]
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
---
arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index edba042b2325..dc6a4842683a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -487,7 +487,7 @@ emit_cond_jmp:
return -EINVAL;
}
- imm64 = (u64)insn1.imm << 32 | imm;
+ imm64 = (u64)insn1.imm << 32 | (u32)imm;
emit_a64_mov_i64(dst, imm64, ctx);
return 1;
--
2.1.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-08 15:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-08 5:39 [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix signedness bug in loading 64-bit immediate Xi Wang
2015-05-08 5:39 ` Xi Wang
2015-05-08 8:38 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-08 8:38 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-08 8:45 ` Xi Wang
2015-05-08 8:45 ` Xi Wang
2015-05-08 15:17 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2015-05-08 15:17 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-08 15:30 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2015-05-08 15:30 ` Alexei Starovoitov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150508151704.GF25587@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.