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: <d6281121-b39b-41ac-a166-69dbfa1f4f79@huawei.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2026 09:13:42 +0800
From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@...wei.com>
To: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
CC: <bjorn@...nel.org>, <ast@...nel.org>, <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	<andrii@...nel.org>, <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, <eddyz87@...il.com>,
	<song@...nel.org>, <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	<kpsingh@...nel.org>, <sdf@...ichev.me>, <haoluo@...gle.com>,
	<jolsa@...nel.org>, <puranjay@...nel.org>, <pjw@...nel.org>,
	<palmer@...belt.com>, <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, <alex@...ti.fr>,
	<bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <jiang.biao@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/3] bpf, riscv: introduce
 emit_store_stack_imm64() for trampoline


On 2026/2/6 20:20, Menglong Dong wrote:
> Introduce a helper to store 64-bit immediate on the trampoline stack with
> a help of a register.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <dongml2@...natelecom.cn>
> Tested-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>
> Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>
> ---
>   arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 25 ++++++++++++++-----------
>   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> index 37888abee70c..e4f45e2e7e2f 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> @@ -926,6 +926,14 @@ static void restore_stack_args(int nr_stack_args, int args_off, int stk_arg_off,
>   	}
>   }
>   
> +static void emit_store_stack_imm64(u8 reg, int stack_off, u64 imm64,
> +				   struct rv_jit_context *ctx)

Some nit. The first parameter can be removed by using a fixed RV_REG_T1. 
Also, placing imm64 before stack_off might looks better.

> +{
> +	/* Load imm64 into reg and store it at [FP + stack_off]. */
> +	emit_imm(reg, (s64)imm64, ctx);
> +	emit_sd(RV_REG_FP, stack_off, reg, ctx);
> +}
> +
>   static int invoke_bpf_prog(struct bpf_tramp_link *l, int args_off, int retval_off,
>   			   int run_ctx_off, bool save_ret, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
>   {
> @@ -933,12 +941,10 @@ static int invoke_bpf_prog(struct bpf_tramp_link *l, int args_off, int retval_of
>   	struct bpf_prog *p = l->link.prog;
>   	int cookie_off = offsetof(struct bpf_tramp_run_ctx, bpf_cookie);
>   
> -	if (l->cookie) {
> -		emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, l->cookie, ctx);
> -		emit_sd(RV_REG_FP, -run_ctx_off + cookie_off, RV_REG_T1, ctx);
> -	} else {
> +	if (l->cookie)
> +		emit_store_stack_imm64(RV_REG_T1, -run_ctx_off + cookie_off, l->cookie, ctx);
> +	else
>   		emit_sd(RV_REG_FP, -run_ctx_off + cookie_off, RV_REG_ZERO, ctx);
> -	}
>   
>   	/* arg1: prog */
>   	emit_imm(RV_REG_A0, (const s64)p, ctx);
> @@ -1123,13 +1129,10 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im,
>   	emit_sd(RV_REG_FP, -sreg_off, RV_REG_S1, ctx);
>   
>   	/* store ip address of the traced function */
> -	if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_IP_ARG) {
> -		emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, (const s64)func_addr, ctx);
> -		emit_sd(RV_REG_FP, -ip_off, RV_REG_T1, ctx);
> -	}
> +	if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_IP_ARG)
> +		emit_store_stack_imm64(RV_REG_T1, -ip_off, (u64)func_addr, ctx); >
> -	emit_li(RV_REG_T1, nr_arg_slots, ctx);
> -	emit_sd(RV_REG_FP, -nregs_off, RV_REG_T1, ctx);
> +	emit_store_stack_imm64(RV_REG_T1, -nregs_off, nr_arg_slots, ctx);
>   
>   	store_args(nr_arg_slots, args_off, ctx);
>   

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ