linux-kernel - [PATCH bpf-next v6 03/11] bpf: x86: Factor out a lookup table for some ALU opcodes

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]

Message-Id: <20210112154235.2192781-4-jackmanb@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jan 2021 15:42:27 +0000
From:   Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>
To:     bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Björn Töpel" <bjorn.topel@...il.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v6 03/11] bpf: x86: Factor out a lookup table for
 some ALU opcodes

A later commit will need to lookup a subset of these opcodes. To
avoid duplicating code, pull out a table.

The shift opcodes won't be needed by that later commit, but they're
already duplicated, so fold them into the table anyway.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
---
 arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 33 +++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index f15c93275a18..93f32e0ba0ef 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -205,6 +205,18 @@ static u8 add_2reg(u8 byte, u32 dst_reg, u32 src_reg)
 	return byte + reg2hex[dst_reg] + (reg2hex[src_reg] << 3);
 }
 
+/* Some 1-byte opcodes for binary ALU operations */
+static u8 simple_alu_opcodes[] = {
+	[BPF_ADD] = 0x01,
+	[BPF_SUB] = 0x29,
+	[BPF_AND] = 0x21,
+	[BPF_OR] = 0x09,
+	[BPF_XOR] = 0x31,
+	[BPF_LSH] = 0xE0,
+	[BPF_RSH] = 0xE8,
+	[BPF_ARSH] = 0xF8,
+};
+
 static void jit_fill_hole(void *area, unsigned int size)
 {
 	/* Fill whole space with INT3 instructions */
@@ -862,15 +874,9 @@ static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *addrs, u8 *image,
 		case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_AND | BPF_X:
 		case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_OR | BPF_X:
 		case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_XOR | BPF_X:
-			switch (BPF_OP(insn->code)) {
-			case BPF_ADD: b2 = 0x01; break;
-			case BPF_SUB: b2 = 0x29; break;
-			case BPF_AND: b2 = 0x21; break;
-			case BPF_OR: b2 = 0x09; break;
-			case BPF_XOR: b2 = 0x31; break;
-			}
 			maybe_emit_mod(&prog, dst_reg, src_reg,
 				       BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64);
+			b2 = simple_alu_opcodes[BPF_OP(insn->code)];
 			EMIT2(b2, add_2reg(0xC0, dst_reg, src_reg));
 			break;
 
@@ -1050,12 +1056,7 @@ static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *addrs, u8 *image,
 			else if (is_ereg(dst_reg))
 				EMIT1(add_1mod(0x40, dst_reg));
 
-			switch (BPF_OP(insn->code)) {
-			case BPF_LSH: b3 = 0xE0; break;
-			case BPF_RSH: b3 = 0xE8; break;
-			case BPF_ARSH: b3 = 0xF8; break;
-			}
-
+			b3 = simple_alu_opcodes[BPF_OP(insn->code)];
 			if (imm32 == 1)
 				EMIT2(0xD1, add_1reg(b3, dst_reg));
 			else
@@ -1089,11 +1090,7 @@ static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *addrs, u8 *image,
 			else if (is_ereg(dst_reg))
 				EMIT1(add_1mod(0x40, dst_reg));
 
-			switch (BPF_OP(insn->code)) {
-			case BPF_LSH: b3 = 0xE0; break;
-			case BPF_RSH: b3 = 0xE8; break;
-			case BPF_ARSH: b3 = 0xF8; break;
-			}
+			b3 = simple_alu_opcodes[BPF_OP(insn->code)];
 			EMIT2(0xD3, add_1reg(b3, dst_reg));
 
 			if (src_reg != BPF_REG_4)
-- 
2.30.0.284.gd98b1dd5eaa7-goog