netdev - [PATCH v7 bpf-next 12/16] s390: bpf: eliminate zero extension code-gen

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: <1558551312-17081-13-git-send-email-jiong.wang@netronome.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 19:55:08 +0100
From:   Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
To:     alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        oss-drivers@...ronome.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        paul.burton@...s.com, udknight@...il.com, zlim.lnx@...il.com,
        illusionist.neo@...il.com, naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com,
        sandipan@...ux.ibm.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com,
        Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
Subject: [PATCH v7 bpf-next 12/16] s390: bpf: eliminate zero extension code-gen

Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
---
 arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 5e7c630..e636728 100644
--- a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -299,9 +299,11 @@ static inline void reg_set_seen(struct bpf_jit *jit, u32 b1)
 
 #define EMIT_ZERO(b1)						\
 ({								\
-	/* llgfr %dst,%dst (zero extend to 64 bit) */		\
-	EMIT4(0xb9160000, b1, b1);				\
-	REG_SET_SEEN(b1);					\
+	if (!fp->aux->verifier_zext) {				\
+		/* llgfr %dst,%dst (zero extend to 64 bit) */	\
+		EMIT4(0xb9160000, b1, b1);			\
+		REG_SET_SEEN(b1);				\
+	}							\
 })
 
 /*
@@ -520,6 +522,8 @@ static noinline int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp, int i
 	case BPF_ALU | BPF_MOV | BPF_X: /* dst = (u32) src */
 		/* llgfr %dst,%src */
 		EMIT4(0xb9160000, dst_reg, src_reg);
+		if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+			insn_count = 2;
 		break;
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOV | BPF_X: /* dst = src */
 		/* lgr %dst,%src */
@@ -528,6 +532,8 @@ static noinline int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp, int i
 	case BPF_ALU | BPF_MOV | BPF_K: /* dst = (u32) imm */
 		/* llilf %dst,imm */
 		EMIT6_IMM(0xc00f0000, dst_reg, imm);
+		if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+			insn_count = 2;
 		break;
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOV | BPF_K: /* dst = imm */
 		/* lgfi %dst,imm */
@@ -639,6 +645,8 @@ static noinline int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp, int i
 		EMIT4(0xb9970000, REG_W0, src_reg);
 		/* llgfr %dst,%rc */
 		EMIT4(0xb9160000, dst_reg, rc_reg);
+		if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+			insn_count = 2;
 		break;
 	}
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X: /* dst = dst / src */
@@ -676,6 +684,8 @@ static noinline int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp, int i
 			      EMIT_CONST_U32(imm));
 		/* llgfr %dst,%rc */
 		EMIT4(0xb9160000, dst_reg, rc_reg);
+		if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+			insn_count = 2;
 		break;
 	}
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_K: /* dst = dst / imm */
@@ -864,10 +874,13 @@ static noinline int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp, int i
 		case 16: /* dst = (u16) cpu_to_be16(dst) */
 			/* llghr %dst,%dst */
 			EMIT4(0xb9850000, dst_reg, dst_reg);
+			if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+				insn_count = 2;
 			break;
 		case 32: /* dst = (u32) cpu_to_be32(dst) */
-			/* llgfr %dst,%dst */
-			EMIT4(0xb9160000, dst_reg, dst_reg);
+			if (!fp->aux->verifier_zext)
+				/* llgfr %dst,%dst */
+				EMIT4(0xb9160000, dst_reg, dst_reg);
 			break;
 		case 64: /* dst = (u64) cpu_to_be64(dst) */
 			break;
@@ -882,12 +895,15 @@ static noinline int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp, int i
 			EMIT4_DISP(0x88000000, dst_reg, REG_0, 16);
 			/* llghr %dst,%dst */
 			EMIT4(0xb9850000, dst_reg, dst_reg);
+			if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+				insn_count = 2;
 			break;
 		case 32: /* dst = (u32) cpu_to_le32(dst) */
 			/* lrvr %dst,%dst */
 			EMIT4(0xb91f0000, dst_reg, dst_reg);
-			/* llgfr %dst,%dst */
-			EMIT4(0xb9160000, dst_reg, dst_reg);
+			if (!fp->aux->verifier_zext)
+				/* llgfr %dst,%dst */
+				EMIT4(0xb9160000, dst_reg, dst_reg);
 			break;
 		case 64: /* dst = (u64) cpu_to_le64(dst) */
 			/* lrvgr %dst,%dst */
@@ -968,16 +984,22 @@ static noinline int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp, int i
 		/* llgc %dst,0(off,%src) */
 		EMIT6_DISP_LH(0xe3000000, 0x0090, dst_reg, src_reg, REG_0, off);
 		jit->seen |= SEEN_MEM;
+		if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+			insn_count = 2;
 		break;
 	case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_H: /* dst = *(u16 *)(ul) (src + off) */
 		/* llgh %dst,0(off,%src) */
 		EMIT6_DISP_LH(0xe3000000, 0x0091, dst_reg, src_reg, REG_0, off);
 		jit->seen |= SEEN_MEM;
+		if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+			insn_count = 2;
 		break;
 	case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_W: /* dst = *(u32 *)(ul) (src + off) */
 		/* llgf %dst,off(%src) */
 		jit->seen |= SEEN_MEM;
 		EMIT6_DISP_LH(0xe3000000, 0x0016, dst_reg, src_reg, REG_0, off);
+		if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
+			insn_count = 2;
 		break;
 	case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW: /* dst = *(u64 *)(ul) (src + off) */
 		/* lg %dst,0(off,%src) */
@@ -1282,6 +1304,11 @@ static int bpf_jit_prog(struct bpf_jit *jit, struct bpf_prog *fp)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+bool bpf_jit_needs_zext(void)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+
 /*
  * Compile eBPF program "fp"
  */
-- 
2.7.4