[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250227195302.1667654-1-brgerst@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 14:53:02 -0500
From: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH -tip 1/1] x86/bpf: Fix BPF percpu accesses
Due to commit 9d7de2aa8b41 ("Use relative percpu offsets"), percpu
addresses went from positive offsets from the GSBASE to negative kernel
virtual addresses. The BPF verifier has an optimization for x86-64 that
loads the address of cpu_number into a register, but was only doing a
32-bit load which truncates negative addresses. Change it to a 64-bit
load so that the address is properly sign-extended.
Fixes: 9d7de2aa8b41 ("Use relative percpu offsets")
Signed-off-by: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 60611df77957..f4859516b190 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -21707,7 +21707,7 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
* way, it's fine to back out this inlining logic
*/
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
- insn_buf[0] = BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, (u32)(unsigned long)&pcpu_hot.cpu_number);
+ insn_buf[0] = BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, (u32)(unsigned long)&pcpu_hot.cpu_number);
insn_buf[1] = BPF_MOV64_PERCPU_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0);
insn_buf[2] = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0);
cnt = 3;
--
2.48.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists