LinuxPPC-Dev Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
To: adubey@linux.ibm.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, maddy@linux.ibm.com,
	ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	shuah@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/7] selftest/bpf: Fixing powerpc JIT disassembly failure
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2026 18:10:35 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <734fe885-ccb1-43c9-b3e4-50615926258e@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260611153826.31187-4-adubey@linux.ibm.com>



On 11/06/26 9:08 pm, adubey@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> From: Abhishek Dubey <adubey@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> Ensure that the trampoline stubs JITed at the tail of the
> epilogue do not expose the dummy trampoline address stored
> in the last 8 bytes(64-bit) and last 4 bytes(32-bit)
> to the disassembly flow. Prevent the disassembler from
> ingesting this memory address, as it may occasionally decode
> into a seemingly valid but incorrect instruction. Fix this
> issue by truncating the last 8/4 bytes from JITed buffers
> before supplying them for disassembly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abhishek Dubey <adubey@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>   .../selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c        | 21 ++++++++++++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c
> index 3558fe10e28c..759d6a86803c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c
> @@ -179,9 +179,11 @@ int get_jited_program_text(int fd, char *text, size_t text_sz)
>   	struct bpf_prog_info info = {};
>   	__u32 info_len = sizeof(info);
>   	__u32 jited_funcs, len, pc;
> +	__u32 trunc_len = 0;
>   	__u32 *func_lens = NULL;
>   	FILE *text_out = NULL;
>   	uint8_t *image = NULL;
> +	char *triple = NULL;
>   	int i, err = 0;
>   
>   	if (!llvm_initialized) {
> @@ -225,9 +227,26 @@ int get_jited_program_text(int fd, char *text, size_t text_sz)
>   	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_get_info_by_fd #2"))
>   		goto out;
>   
> +	/*
> +	 * last 8 bytes contains dummy_trampoline address in JIT
> +	 * output on 64-bit and last 4 bytes on 32-bit powerpc,
> +	 * which can't disassemble to a valid instruction.
> +	 */
> +	triple = LLVMGetDefaultTargetTriple();
> +	if (triple) {
> +		if (strstr(triple, "powerpc64") || strstr(triple, "ppc64"))
> +			trunc_len = 8;
> +		else if (strstr(triple, "powerpc") || strstr(triple, "ppc"))
> +			trunc_len = 4;
> +		LLVMDisposeMessage(triple);
> +	}
> +
>   	for (pc = 0, i = 0; i < jited_funcs; ++i) {
>   		fprintf(text_out, "func #%d:\n", i);
> -		disasm_one_func(text_out, image + pc, func_lens[i]);

> +		// Disabled JIT have zero func_lens, hence underflow
> +		__u32 disasm_len = func_lens[i] > trunc_len ?
> +					func_lens[i] - trunc_len : 0;

Following the traditional C style, declare the variable at the start
of the block and leave a blank line before the fprintf() statement.
Also, fix the comment style as noted by the bot.

> +		disasm_one_func(text_out, image + pc, disasm_len);
>   		fprintf(text_out, "\n");
>   		pc += func_lens[i];
>   	}

- Hari


  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-13 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-11 15:38 [PATCH v7 0/7] powerpc/bpf: Add support for verifier selftest adubey
2026-06-11 15:38 ` [PATCH v7 1/7] powerpc/bpf: fix alignment of long branch trampoline address adubey
2026-06-13 12:34   ` Hari Bathini
2026-06-11 15:38 ` [PATCH v7 2/7] powerpc/bpf: Move out dummy_tramp_addr after Long branch stub adubey
2026-06-11 12:18   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-13 12:37   ` Hari Bathini
2026-06-11 15:38 ` [PATCH v7 3/7] selftest/bpf: Fixing powerpc JIT disassembly failure adubey
2026-06-13 12:40   ` Hari Bathini [this message]
2026-06-11 15:38 ` [PATCH v7 4/7] selftest/bpf: Enable verifier selftest for powerpc64 adubey
2026-06-13 12:48   ` Hari Bathini
2026-06-11 15:38 ` [PATCH v7 5/7] powerpc64/bpf: fix compare instruction emitted for tailcall adubey
2026-06-13 12:41   ` Hari Bathini
2026-06-11 15:38 ` [PATCH v7 6/7] selftest/bpf: Add tailcall verifier selftest for powerpc64 adubey
2026-06-13 12:42   ` Hari Bathini
2026-06-11 15:38 ` [PATCH v7 7/7] powerpc/bpf: fix buffer overflow in JIT for large BPF programs adubey
2026-06-13 12:44   ` Hari Bathini

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=734fe885-ccb1-43c9-b3e4-50615926258e@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=adubey@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.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