[PATCH bpf] s390/bpf: Fix bpf_arch_text_poke() with new_addr == NULL

[Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thomas Richter reported a crash in linux-next with a backtrace similar
to the following one:

	 [<0000000000000000>] 0x0
	([<000000000031a182>] bpf_trace_run4+0xc2/0x218)
	 [<00000000001d59f4>] __bpf_trace_sched_switch+0x1c/0x28
	 [<0000000000c44a3a>] __schedule+0x43a/0x890
	 [<0000000000c44ef8>] schedule+0x68/0x110
	 [<0000000000c4e5ca>] do_nanosleep+0xa2/0x168
	 [<000000000026e7fe>] hrtimer_nanosleep+0xf6/0x1c0
	 [<000000000026eb6e>] __s390x_sys_nanosleep+0xb6/0xf0
	 [<0000000000c3b81c>] __do_syscall+0x1e4/0x208
	 [<0000000000c50510>] system_call+0x70/0x98
	Last Breaking-Event-Address:
	 [<000003ff7fda1814>] bpf_prog_65e887c70a835bbf_on_switch+0x1a4/0x1f0

The problem is that bpf_arch_text_poke() with new_addr == NULL is
susceptible to the following race condition:

	T1                 T2
        -----------------  -------------------
	plt.target = NULL
	                   entry: brcl 0xf,plt
	entry.mask = 0
	                   lgrl %r1,plt.target
	                   br %r1

Fix by setting PLT target to the instruction following `brcl 0xf,plt`
instead of 0. This way T2 will simply resume the execution of the eBPF
program, which is the desired effect of passing new_addr == NULL.

Fixes: f1d5df84cd8c ("s390/bpf: Implement bpf_arch_text_poke()")
Reported-by: Thomas Richter <tmricht@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 7102e4b674a0..f95d7e401b96 100644
--- a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ static void bpf_jit_plt(void *plt, void *ret, void *target)
 {
 	memcpy(plt, bpf_plt, BPF_PLT_SIZE);
 	*(void **)((char *)plt + (bpf_plt_ret - bpf_plt)) = ret;
-	*(void **)((char *)plt + (bpf_plt_target - bpf_plt)) = target;
+	*(void **)((char *)plt + (bpf_plt_target - bpf_plt)) = target ?: ret;
 }
 
 /*
@@ -2015,7 +2015,9 @@ int bpf_arch_text_poke(void *ip, enum bpf_text_poke_type t,
 	} __packed insn;
 	char expected_plt[BPF_PLT_SIZE];
 	char current_plt[BPF_PLT_SIZE];
+	char new_plt[BPF_PLT_SIZE];
 	char *plt;
+	char *ret;
 	int err;
 
 	/* Verify the branch to be patched. */
@@ -2037,12 +2039,15 @@ int bpf_arch_text_poke(void *ip, enum bpf_text_poke_type t,
 		err = copy_from_kernel_nofault(current_plt, plt, BPF_PLT_SIZE);
 		if (err < 0)
 			return err;
-		bpf_jit_plt(expected_plt, (char *)ip + 6, old_addr);
+		ret = (char *)ip + 6;
+		bpf_jit_plt(expected_plt, ret, old_addr);
 		if (memcmp(current_plt, expected_plt, BPF_PLT_SIZE))
 			return -EINVAL;
 		/* Adjust the call address. */
+		bpf_jit_plt(new_plt, ret, new_addr);
 		s390_kernel_write(plt + (bpf_plt_target - bpf_plt),
-				  &new_addr, sizeof(void *));
+				  new_plt + (bpf_plt_target - bpf_plt),
+				  sizeof(void *));
 	}
 
 	/* Adjust the mask of the branch. */
-- 
2.39.2