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  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:   Wed, 1 May 2019 15:59:22 +0100
From:   Jiong Wang <>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <>,
        Daniel Borkmann <>,
        Networking <>,,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: 32-bit zext time complexity (Was Re: [PATCH bpf-next]
 selftests/bpf: two scale tests)

> > if you can craft a test that shows patch_insn issue before your set,
> > then it's ok to hack bpf_fill_scale1 to use alu64.
> As described above, does the test_verifier 732 + jit blinding looks convincing?
> > I would also prefer to go with option 2 (new zext insn) for JITs.
> Got it.

I followed option 2 and have sent out v5 with latests changes/fixes:

The major changes are:
  - introduced BPF_ZEXT, even though it doesn't resolve insn patch in-efficient,
    but could let JIT back-ends do optimal code-gen, and the change is small,
    so perhap just better to support it in this set.
  - while look insn patch code, I feel patched-insn need to be conservatiely
    marked if any insn inside patch buffer define sub-register.
  - Also fixed helper function return value handling bug. I am thinking helper
    function should have accurate return value type description, otherwise
    there could be bug. For example arm32 back-end just executes the native
    helper functions and doesn't do anything special on the return value. So
    a function returns u32 would only set native reg r0, not r1 in the pair.
    Then if the outside eBPF insn is casting it into u64, there needs to be
  - adjusted test_verifier to make sure it could pass on hosts w and w/o hw

For more info, please see the cover letter and patch description at v5.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists