netdev - [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] bpf, verifier: avoid retpoline for map push/pop/peek operation

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: <20181021000928.15705-6-daniel@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Sun, 21 Oct 2018 02:09:27 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] bpf, verifier: avoid retpoline for map push/pop/peek operation

Extend prior work from 09772d92cd5a ("bpf: avoid retpoline for
lookup/update/delete calls on maps") to also apply to the recently
added map helpers that perform push/pop/peek operations so that
the indirect call can be avoided.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 4f727c9..98fa0be 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -6178,7 +6178,10 @@ static int fixup_bpf_calls(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 		if (prog->jit_requested && BITS_PER_LONG == 64 &&
 		    (insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem ||
 		     insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_update_elem ||
-		     insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_delete_elem)) {
+		     insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_delete_elem ||
+		     insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_push_elem   ||
+		     insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_pop_elem    ||
+		     insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_map_peek_elem)) {
 			aux = &env->insn_aux_data[i + delta];
 			if (bpf_map_ptr_poisoned(aux))
 				goto patch_call_imm;
@@ -6211,6 +6214,14 @@ static int fixup_bpf_calls(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 			BUILD_BUG_ON(!__same_type(ops->map_update_elem,
 				     (int (*)(struct bpf_map *map, void *key, void *value,
 					      u64 flags))NULL));
+			BUILD_BUG_ON(!__same_type(ops->map_push_elem,
+				     (int (*)(struct bpf_map *map, void *value,
+					      u64 flags))NULL));
+			BUILD_BUG_ON(!__same_type(ops->map_pop_elem,
+				     (int (*)(struct bpf_map *map, void *value))NULL));
+			BUILD_BUG_ON(!__same_type(ops->map_peek_elem,
+				     (int (*)(struct bpf_map *map, void *value))NULL));
+
 			switch (insn->imm) {
 			case BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem:
 				insn->imm = BPF_CAST_CALL(ops->map_lookup_elem) -
@@ -6224,6 +6235,18 @@ static int fixup_bpf_calls(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 				insn->imm = BPF_CAST_CALL(ops->map_delete_elem) -
 					    __bpf_call_base;
 				continue;
+			case BPF_FUNC_map_push_elem:
+				insn->imm = BPF_CAST_CALL(ops->map_push_elem) -
+					    __bpf_call_base;
+				continue;
+			case BPF_FUNC_map_pop_elem:
+				insn->imm = BPF_CAST_CALL(ops->map_pop_elem) -
+					    __bpf_call_base;
+				continue;
+			case BPF_FUNC_map_peek_elem:
+				insn->imm = BPF_CAST_CALL(ops->map_peek_elem) -
+					    __bpf_call_base;
+				continue;
 			}
 
 			goto patch_call_imm;
-- 
2.9.5