linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 1/3] Extended BPF interpreter and converter

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 04 Mar 2014 19:23:16 +0100
From:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>,
	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jovi Zhangwei <jovi.zhangwei@...il.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@....fi>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 1/3] Extended BPF interpreter and converter

On 03/04/2014 06:09 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com> wrote:
...
>> Hmm, so the case statement is about BPF_RET | BPF_A and BPF_RET | BPF_K
>> but BPF_RET | BPF_X is not mentioned. However, in BPF_SRC(fp->code)
>> selection you fall back to BPF_X if it doesn't equal BPF_K? Is that
>> correct? And, you probably also need to handle BPF_RET | BPF_X ?
>
> :) that design choice of original BPF always puzzled me.
> BPF_A macro only used in one insn: BPF_RET + BPF_A
> and all other insns use BPF_K and BPF_X
> and though comment in uapi/filter.h says "ret - BPF_K and BPF_X also apply"
> this is not true, since sk_chk_filter() only allows ret+a and ret+k
> libpcap is equally confused. It never generates ret+x, but has few
> places in the code
> that can recognize it. I guess that's an artifact of distant past.

Good point, ret+a and ret+k are main users anyway, though we could fix
that limitation actually. ;)

> epbf has only one RET insn that takes register R0 and returns it.
> That is similar to real CPU 'ret' insn and done to make epbf easier
> to generate from gcc/llvm point of view.
> ebpf jit converts 'ret' into 'leave; ret' on x86_64.
>
> so original bpf+k and bpf+a are converted into 'mov r0, [a or k]; ret r0'
>
> btw, if there is interest I can put ebpf testsuite into tools/net/

Yes, please. Would be great if you can place the test suite under:

   tools/testing/selftests/net/bpf/

I believe some stuff there could get its own folder e.g. "packet"
for PF_PACKET test cases etc, so that we can easily arrange them.
--
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/