[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1389795398.31367.329.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 06:16:38 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, dborkman@...hat.com,
darkjames-ws@...kjames.pl, Mircea Gherzan <mgherzan@...il.com>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
Matt Evans <matt@...abs.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bpf: do not use reciprocal divide
On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 09:00 +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:02:41PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> > index 16871da37371..e349dc7d0992 100644
> > --- a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> > +++ b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> > @@ -371,11 +371,11 @@ static int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct sock_filter *filter,
> > /* dr %r4,%r12 */
> > EMIT2(0x1d4c);
> > break;
> > - case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A = reciprocal_divide(A, K) */
> > - /* m %r4,<d(K)>(%r13) */
> > - EMIT4_DISP(0x5c40d000, EMIT_CONST(K));
> > - /* lr %r5,%r4 */
> > - EMIT2(0x1854);
> > + case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A /= K */
> > + /* lhi %r4,0 */
> > + EMIT4(0xa7480000);
> > + /* d %r4,<d(K)>(%r13) */
> > + EMIT4_DISP(0x5d40d000, EMIT_CONST(K));
> > break;
>
> The s390 part looks good.
>
> > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> > index 01b780856db2..ad30d626a5bd 100644
> > --- a/net/core/filter.c
> > +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> > @@ -166,7 +165,7 @@ unsigned int sk_run_filter(const struct sk_buff *skb,
> > A /= X;
> > continue;
> > case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K:
> > - A = reciprocal_divide(A, K);
> > + A /= K;
> > continue;
> > case BPF_S_ALU_MOD_X:
> > if (X == 0)
> > @@ -553,11 +552,6 @@ int sk_chk_filter(struct sock_filter *filter, unsigned int flen)
> > /* Some instructions need special checks */
> > switch (code) {
> > case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K:
> > - /* check for division by zero */
> > - if (ftest->k == 0)
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > - ftest->k = reciprocal_value(ftest->k);
> > - break;
>
> Are you sure you want to remove the k == 0 check? Is there something
> else that would prevent a division by zero?
This is done by factoring the two cases, modulo and divide :
vi +553 net/core/filter.c
/* Some instructions need special checks */
switch (code) {
case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K:
case BPF_S_ALU_MOD_K:
/* check for division by zero */
if (ftest->k == 0)
return -EINVAL;
break;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists