linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.14 134/151] powerpc/bpf: Fix BPF

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:   Mon, 11 Oct 2021 15:46:46 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.14 134/151] powerpc/bpf: Fix BPF_SUB when imm == 0x80000000

From: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

[ Upstream commit 5855c4c1f415ca3ba1046e77c0b3d3dfc96c9025 ]

We aren't handling subtraction involving an immediate value of
0x80000000 properly. Fix the same.

Fixes: 156d0e290e969c ("powerpc/ebpf/jit: Implement JIT compiler for extended BPF")
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
[mpe: Fold in fix from Naveen to use imm <= 32768]
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/fc4b1276eb10761fd7ce0814c8dd089da2815251.1633464148.git.naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
index d16b97179646..dff4a2930970 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
@@ -328,18 +328,25 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context *
 			EMIT(PPC_RAW_SUB(dst_reg, dst_reg, src_reg));
 			goto bpf_alu32_trunc;
 		case BPF_ALU | BPF_ADD | BPF_K: /* (u32) dst += (u32) imm */
-		case BPF_ALU | BPF_SUB | BPF_K: /* (u32) dst -= (u32) imm */
 		case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ADD | BPF_K: /* dst += imm */
+			if (!imm) {
+				goto bpf_alu32_trunc;
+			} else if (imm >= -32768 && imm < 32768) {
+				EMIT(PPC_RAW_ADDI(dst_reg, dst_reg, IMM_L(imm)));
+			} else {
+				PPC_LI32(b2p[TMP_REG_1], imm);
+				EMIT(PPC_RAW_ADD(dst_reg, dst_reg, b2p[TMP_REG_1]));
+			}
+			goto bpf_alu32_trunc;
+		case BPF_ALU | BPF_SUB | BPF_K: /* (u32) dst -= (u32) imm */
 		case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_SUB | BPF_K: /* dst -= imm */
-			if (BPF_OP(code) == BPF_SUB)
-				imm = -imm;
-			if (imm) {
-				if (imm >= -32768 && imm < 32768)
-					EMIT(PPC_RAW_ADDI(dst_reg, dst_reg, IMM_L(imm)));
-				else {
-					PPC_LI32(b2p[TMP_REG_1], imm);
-					EMIT(PPC_RAW_ADD(dst_reg, dst_reg, b2p[TMP_REG_1]));
-				}
+			if (!imm) {
+				goto bpf_alu32_trunc;
+			} else if (imm > -32768 && imm <= 32768) {
+				EMIT(PPC_RAW_ADDI(dst_reg, dst_reg, IMM_L(-imm)));
+			} else {
+				PPC_LI32(b2p[TMP_REG_1], imm);
+				EMIT(PPC_RAW_SUB(dst_reg, dst_reg, b2p[TMP_REG_1]));
 			}
 			goto bpf_alu32_trunc;
 		case BPF_ALU | BPF_MUL | BPF_X: /* (u32) dst *= (u32) src */
-- 
2.33.0