On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 03:32:08PM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote: > From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Partially undo old commit 144cd91c4c2b ("bpf: move tmp variable into ax > register in interpreter"). The reason we need this here is because ax > register will be used for holding temporary state for div/mod instruction > which otherwise interpreter would corrupt. This will cause a small +8 byte > stack increase for interpreter, but with the gain that we can use it from > verifier rewrites as scratch register. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx> > [cascardo: This partial revert is needed in order to support using AX for > the following two commits, as there is no JMP32 on 4.19.y] > Signed-off-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > kernel/bpf/core.c | 32 +++++++++++++++----------------- > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c > index e7211b0fa27c..30d871be9974 100644 > --- a/kernel/bpf/core.c > +++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c > @@ -616,9 +616,6 @@ static int bpf_jit_blind_insn(const struct bpf_insn *from, > * below. > * > * Constant blinding is only used by JITs, not in the interpreter. > - * The interpreter uses AX in some occasions as a local temporary > - * register e.g. in DIV or MOD instructions. > - * > * In restricted circumstances, the verifier can also use the AX > * register for rewrites as long as they do not interfere with > * the above cases! > @@ -951,6 +948,7 @@ static unsigned int ___bpf_prog_run(u64 *regs, const struct bpf_insn *insn, > u32 tail_call_cnt = 0; > void *ptr; > int off; > + u64 tmp; > > #define CONT ({ insn++; goto select_insn; }) > #define CONT_JMP ({ insn++; goto select_insn; }) > @@ -1013,22 +1011,22 @@ static unsigned int ___bpf_prog_run(u64 *regs, const struct bpf_insn *insn, > ALU64_MOD_X: > if (unlikely(SRC == 0)) > return 0; > - div64_u64_rem(DST, SRC, &AX); > - DST = AX; > + div64_u64_rem(DST, SRC, &tmp); > + DST = tmp; > CONT; > ALU_MOD_X: > if (unlikely((u32)SRC == 0)) > return 0; > - AX = (u32) DST; > - DST = do_div(AX, (u32) SRC); > + tmp = (u32) DST; > + DST = do_div(tmp, (u32) SRC); > CONT; > ALU64_MOD_K: > - div64_u64_rem(DST, IMM, &AX); > - DST = AX; > + div64_u64_rem(DST, IMM, &tmp); > + DST = tmp; > CONT; > ALU_MOD_K: > - AX = (u32) DST; > - DST = do_div(AX, (u32) IMM); > + tmp = (u32) DST; > + DST = do_div(tmp, (u32) IMM); > CONT; > ALU64_DIV_X: > if (unlikely(SRC == 0)) > @@ -1038,17 +1036,17 @@ static unsigned int ___bpf_prog_run(u64 *regs, const struct bpf_insn *insn, > ALU_DIV_X: > if (unlikely((u32)SRC == 0)) > return 0; > - AX = (u32) DST; > - do_div(AX, (u32) SRC); > - DST = (u32) AX; > + tmp = (u32) DST; > + do_div(tmp, (u32) SRC); > + DST = (u32) tmp; > CONT; > ALU64_DIV_K: > DST = div64_u64(DST, IMM); > CONT; > ALU_DIV_K: > - AX = (u32) DST; > - do_div(AX, (u32) IMM); > - DST = (u32) AX; > + tmp = (u32) DST; > + do_div(tmp, (u32) IMM); > + DST = (u32) tmp; > CONT; > ALU_END_TO_BE: > switch (IMM) { > -- > 2.30.2 > Oops, no, this patch causes build errors: kernel/bpf/core.c: In function ‘___bpf_prog_run’: kernel/bpf/core.c:951:13: error: redeclaration of ‘tmp’ with no linkage 951 | u64 tmp; | ^~~ kernel/bpf/core.c:839:13: note: previous declaration of ‘tmp’ with type ‘u64’ {aka ‘long long unsigned int’} 839 | u64 tmp; | ^~~ make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:329: kernel/bpf/core.o] Error 1 Please fix up and resend the whole series, as I will go drop these 3 patches from the 4.14.y queue now. greg k-h