[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B7208@saturn3.aculab.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:15:02 +0100
From: "David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: "Xi Wang" <xi.wang@...il.com>,
"Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: "Daniel Borkmann" <dborkman@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Russell King" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"Heiko Carstens" <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"Will Drewry" <wad@...omium.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH net-next 2/6] x86: bpf_jit_comp: support BPF_S_ANC_SECCOMP_LD_W instruction
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER
> >> + case BPF_S_ANC_SECCOMP_LD_W:
> >> + if (K == offsetof(struct seccomp_data, arch)) {
> >> + int arch = syscall_get_arch(current, NULL);
> >> +
> >> + EMIT1_off32(0xb8, arch); /* mov arch,%eax */
> >> + break;
> >> + }
> >> + func = (u8 *)seccomp_bpf_load;
> >> + t_offset = func - (image + addrs[i]);
> >> + EMIT1_off32(0xbf, K); /* mov imm32,%edi */
> >> + EMIT1_off32(0xe8, t_offset); /* call seccomp_bpf_load */
> >> + break;
> >> +#endif
> >
> > This seems seriously wrong to me.
>
> Can you elaborate?
The 'call seccomp_bpf_load' needs a pc-relative offset,
I assume that is what EMIT1_off32() generates.
The other two instructions want an absolute 32 bit value...
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists