On 2/7/22 5:14 AM, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
remote_port is another case of a BPF context field documented as a 32-bit
value in network byte order for which the BPF context access converter
generates a load of a zero-padded 16-bit integer in network byte order.
First such case was dst_port in bpf_sock which got addressed in commit
4421a582718a ("bpf: Make dst_port field in struct bpf_sock 16-bit wide").
Loading 4-bytes from the remote_port offset and converting the value with
bpf_ntohl() leads to surprising results, as the expected value is shifted
by 16 bits.
Reduce the confusion by splitting the field in two - a 16-bit field holding
a big-endian integer, and a 16-bit zero-padding anonymous field that
follows it.
Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx>
