From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
To: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, <ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
<martin.lau@kernel.org>
Cc: <andrii@kernel.org>, <kernel-team@meta.com>
Subject: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 11/17] bpf: rename is_branch_taken reg arguments to prepare for the second one
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2023 20:37:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231102033759.2541186-12-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231102033759.2541186-1-andrii@kernel.org>
Just taking mundane refactoring bits out into a separate patch. No
functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 108 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 8802172fe8c9..725f327ce5eb 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -14167,26 +14167,26 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
}));
}
-static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
+static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u32 val, u8 opcode)
{
- struct tnum subreg = tnum_subreg(reg->var_off);
+ struct tnum subreg = tnum_subreg(reg1->var_off);
s32 sval = (s32)val;
switch (opcode) {
case BPF_JEQ:
if (tnum_is_const(subreg))
return !!tnum_equals_const(subreg, val);
- else if (val < reg->u32_min_value || val > reg->u32_max_value)
+ else if (val < reg1->u32_min_value || val > reg1->u32_max_value)
return 0;
- else if (sval < reg->s32_min_value || sval > reg->s32_max_value)
+ else if (sval < reg1->s32_min_value || sval > reg1->s32_max_value)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JNE:
if (tnum_is_const(subreg))
return !tnum_equals_const(subreg, val);
- else if (val < reg->u32_min_value || val > reg->u32_max_value)
+ else if (val < reg1->u32_min_value || val > reg1->u32_max_value)
return 1;
- else if (sval < reg->s32_min_value || sval > reg->s32_max_value)
+ else if (sval < reg1->s32_min_value || sval > reg1->s32_max_value)
return 1;
break;
case BPF_JSET:
@@ -14196,51 +14196,51 @@ static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JGT:
- if (reg->u32_min_value > val)
+ if (reg1->u32_min_value > val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->u32_max_value <= val)
+ else if (reg1->u32_max_value <= val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSGT:
- if (reg->s32_min_value > sval)
+ if (reg1->s32_min_value > sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->s32_max_value <= sval)
+ else if (reg1->s32_max_value <= sval)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JLT:
- if (reg->u32_max_value < val)
+ if (reg1->u32_max_value < val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->u32_min_value >= val)
+ else if (reg1->u32_min_value >= val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSLT:
- if (reg->s32_max_value < sval)
+ if (reg1->s32_max_value < sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->s32_min_value >= sval)
+ else if (reg1->s32_min_value >= sval)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JGE:
- if (reg->u32_min_value >= val)
+ if (reg1->u32_min_value >= val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->u32_max_value < val)
+ else if (reg1->u32_max_value < val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSGE:
- if (reg->s32_min_value >= sval)
+ if (reg1->s32_min_value >= sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->s32_max_value < sval)
+ else if (reg1->s32_max_value < sval)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JLE:
- if (reg->u32_max_value <= val)
+ if (reg1->u32_max_value <= val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->u32_min_value > val)
+ else if (reg1->u32_min_value > val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSLE:
- if (reg->s32_max_value <= sval)
+ if (reg1->s32_max_value <= sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->s32_min_value > sval)
+ else if (reg1->s32_min_value > sval)
return 0;
break;
}
@@ -14249,79 +14249,79 @@ static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
}
-static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode)
+static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode)
{
s64 sval = (s64)val;
switch (opcode) {
case BPF_JEQ:
- if (tnum_is_const(reg->var_off))
- return !!tnum_equals_const(reg->var_off, val);
- else if (val < reg->umin_value || val > reg->umax_value)
+ if (tnum_is_const(reg1->var_off))
+ return !!tnum_equals_const(reg1->var_off, val);
+ else if (val < reg1->umin_value || val > reg1->umax_value)
return 0;
- else if (sval < reg->smin_value || sval > reg->smax_value)
+ else if (sval < reg1->smin_value || sval > reg1->smax_value)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JNE:
- if (tnum_is_const(reg->var_off))
- return !tnum_equals_const(reg->var_off, val);
- else if (val < reg->umin_value || val > reg->umax_value)
+ if (tnum_is_const(reg1->var_off))
+ return !tnum_equals_const(reg1->var_off, val);
+ else if (val < reg1->umin_value || val > reg1->umax_value)
return 1;
- else if (sval < reg->smin_value || sval > reg->smax_value)
+ else if (sval < reg1->smin_value || sval > reg1->smax_value)
return 1;
break;
case BPF_JSET:
- if ((~reg->var_off.mask & reg->var_off.value) & val)
+ if ((~reg1->var_off.mask & reg1->var_off.value) & val)
return 1;
- if (!((reg->var_off.mask | reg->var_off.value) & val))
+ if (!((reg1->var_off.mask | reg1->var_off.value) & val))
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JGT:
- if (reg->umin_value > val)
+ if (reg1->umin_value > val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->umax_value <= val)
+ else if (reg1->umax_value <= val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSGT:
- if (reg->smin_value > sval)
+ if (reg1->smin_value > sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->smax_value <= sval)
+ else if (reg1->smax_value <= sval)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JLT:
- if (reg->umax_value < val)
+ if (reg1->umax_value < val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->umin_value >= val)
+ else if (reg1->umin_value >= val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSLT:
- if (reg->smax_value < sval)
+ if (reg1->smax_value < sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->smin_value >= sval)
+ else if (reg1->smin_value >= sval)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JGE:
- if (reg->umin_value >= val)
+ if (reg1->umin_value >= val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->umax_value < val)
+ else if (reg1->umax_value < val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSGE:
- if (reg->smin_value >= sval)
+ if (reg1->smin_value >= sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->smax_value < sval)
+ else if (reg1->smax_value < sval)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JLE:
- if (reg->umax_value <= val)
+ if (reg1->umax_value <= val)
return 1;
- else if (reg->umin_value > val)
+ else if (reg1->umin_value > val)
return 0;
break;
case BPF_JSLE:
- if (reg->smax_value <= sval)
+ if (reg1->smax_value <= sval)
return 1;
- else if (reg->smin_value > sval)
+ else if (reg1->smin_value > sval)
return 0;
break;
}
@@ -14336,11 +14336,11 @@ static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode)
* -1 - unknown. Example: "if (reg < 5)" is unknown when register value
* range [0,10]
*/
-static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode,
+static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode,
bool is_jmp32)
{
- if (__is_pointer_value(false, reg)) {
- if (!reg_not_null(reg))
+ if (__is_pointer_value(false, reg1)) {
+ if (!reg_not_null(reg1))
return -1;
/* If pointer is valid tests against zero will fail so we can
@@ -14360,8 +14360,8 @@ static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode,
}
if (is_jmp32)
- return is_branch32_taken(reg, val, opcode);
- return is_branch64_taken(reg, val, opcode);
+ return is_branch32_taken(reg1, val, opcode);
+ return is_branch64_taken(reg1, val, opcode);
}
static int flip_opcode(u32 opcode)
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-02 3:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-02 3:37 [PATCH v6 bpf-next 00/17] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 01/17] selftests/bpf: fix RELEASE=1 build for tc_opts Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 02/17] selftests/bpf: satisfy compiler by having explicit return in btf test Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 03/17] bpf: derive smin/smax from umin/max bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 04/17] bpf: derive smin32/smax32 from umin32/umax32 bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 05/17] bpf: derive subreg bounds from full bounds when upper 32 bits are constant Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 06/17] bpf: add special smin32/smax32 derivation from 64-bit bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 07/17] bpf: improve deduction of 64-bit bounds from 32-bit bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 14:39 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-11-02 16:17 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-03 3:43 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 08/17] bpf: try harder to deduce register bounds from different numeric domains Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 09/17] bpf: drop knowledge-losing __reg_combine_{32,64}_into_{64,32} logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 15:14 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 10/17] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2023-11-02 15:15 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 11/17] bpf: rename is_branch_taken reg arguments to prepare for the second one Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 12/17] bpf: generalize is_branch_taken() to work with two registers Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 15:19 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 13/17] bpf: move is_branch_taken() down Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 14/17] bpf: generalize is_branch_taken to handle all conditional jumps in one place Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 15/17] bpf: unify 32-bit and 64-bit is_branch_taken logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 16/17] bpf: prepare reg_set_min_max for second set of registers Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 3:37 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 17/17] bpf: generalize reg_set_min_max() to handle two sets of two registers Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-02 16:10 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 00/17] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20231102033759.2541186-12-andrii@kernel.org \
--to=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox