Re: [PATCH bpf-next 01/11] bpf: Disable zero-extension for BPF_MEMSX

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 8/29/23 9:07 PM, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
On the architectures that use bpf_jit_needs_zext(), e.g., s390x, the
verifier incorrectly inserts a zero-extension after BPF_MEMSX, leading
to miscompilations like the one below:

       24:       89 1a ff fe 00 00 00 00 "r1 = *(s16 *)(r10 - 2);"       # zext_dst set
    0x3ff7fdb910e:       lgh     %r2,-2(%r13,%r0)                        # load halfword
    0x3ff7fdb9114:       llgfr   %r2,%r2                                 # wrong!
       25:       65 10 00 03 00 00 7f ff if r1 s> 32767 goto +3 <l0_1>   # check_cond_jmp_op()

Disable such zero-extensions. The JITs need to insert sign-extension
themselves, if necessary.

Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@xxxxxxxxx>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux