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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 10:07:32 +0000 (UTC) From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu> To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...omium.org, naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com, sandipan@...ux.ibm.com Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org Subject: [RFC PATCH v1 2/7] powerpc/bpf: Change register numbering for bpf_set/is_seen_register() Instead of using BPF register number as input in functions bpf_set_seen_register() and bpf_is_seen_register(), use CPU register number directly. Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu> --- arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 16 ++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c index 022103c6a201..26a836a904f5 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c @@ -31,12 +31,12 @@ static inline void bpf_flush_icache(void *start, void *end) static inline bool bpf_is_seen_register(struct codegen_context *ctx, int i) { - return (ctx->seen & (1 << (31 - b2p[i]))); + return ctx->seen & (1 << (31 - i)); } static inline void bpf_set_seen_register(struct codegen_context *ctx, int i) { - ctx->seen |= (1 << (31 - b2p[i])); + ctx->seen |= 1 << (31 - i); } static inline bool bpf_has_stack_frame(struct codegen_context *ctx) @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ static inline bool bpf_has_stack_frame(struct codegen_context *ctx) * - the bpf program uses its stack area * The latter condition is deduced from the usage of BPF_REG_FP */ - return ctx->seen & SEEN_FUNC || bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, BPF_REG_FP); + return ctx->seen & SEEN_FUNC || bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, b2p[BPF_REG_FP]); } /* @@ -124,11 +124,11 @@ static void bpf_jit_build_prologue(u32 *image, struct codegen_context *ctx) * in the protected zone below the previous stack frame */ for (i = BPF_REG_6; i <= BPF_REG_10; i++) - if (bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, i)) + if (bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, b2p[i])) PPC_BPF_STL(b2p[i], 1, bpf_jit_stack_offsetof(ctx, b2p[i])); /* Setup frame pointer to point to the bpf stack area */ - if (bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, BPF_REG_FP)) + if (bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, b2p[BPF_REG_FP])) EMIT(PPC_RAW_ADDI(b2p[BPF_REG_FP], 1, STACK_FRAME_MIN_SIZE + ctx->stack_size)); } @@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ static void bpf_jit_emit_common_epilogue(u32 *image, struct codegen_context *ctx /* Restore NVRs */ for (i = BPF_REG_6; i <= BPF_REG_10; i++) - if (bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, i)) + if (bpf_is_seen_register(ctx, b2p[i])) PPC_BPF_LL(b2p[i], 1, bpf_jit_stack_offsetof(ctx, b2p[i])); /* Tear down our stack frame */ @@ -330,9 +330,9 @@ static int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, * any issues. */ if (dst_reg >= BPF_PPC_NVR_MIN && dst_reg < 32) - bpf_set_seen_register(ctx, insn[i].dst_reg); + bpf_set_seen_register(ctx, dst_reg); if (src_reg >= BPF_PPC_NVR_MIN && src_reg < 32) - bpf_set_seen_register(ctx, insn[i].src_reg); + bpf_set_seen_register(ctx, src_reg); switch (code) { /* -- 2.25.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists