netdev - [PATCH v9 bpf-next 11/17] arm: 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: <1558736728-7229-12-git-send-email-jiong.wang@netronome.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 May 2019 23:25:22 +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 v9 bpf-next 11/17] arm: bpf: eliminate zero extension code-gen

Cc: Shubham Bansal <illusionist.neo@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
---
 arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
index c8bfbbf..97a6b4b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
+++ b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
@@ -736,7 +736,8 @@ static inline void emit_a32_alu_r64(const bool is64, const s8 dst[],
 
 		/* ALU operation */
 		emit_alu_r(rd[1], rs, true, false, op, ctx);
-		emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
 	}
 
 	arm_bpf_put_reg64(dst, rd, ctx);
@@ -758,8 +759,9 @@ static inline void emit_a32_mov_r64(const bool is64, const s8 dst[],
 				  struct jit_ctx *ctx) {
 	if (!is64) {
 		emit_a32_mov_r(dst_lo, src_lo, ctx);
-		/* Zero out high 4 bytes */
-		emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			/* Zero out high 4 bytes */
+			emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
 	} else if (__LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ < 6 &&
 		   ctx->cpu_architecture < CPU_ARCH_ARMv5TE) {
 		/* complete 8 byte move */
@@ -1060,17 +1062,20 @@ static inline void emit_ldx_r(const s8 dst[], const s8 src,
 	case BPF_B:
 		/* Load a Byte */
 		emit(ARM_LDRB_I(rd[1], rm, off), ctx);
-		emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
 		break;
 	case BPF_H:
 		/* Load a HalfWord */
 		emit(ARM_LDRH_I(rd[1], rm, off), ctx);
-		emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
 		break;
 	case BPF_W:
 		/* Load a Word */
 		emit(ARM_LDR_I(rd[1], rm, off), ctx);
-		emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			emit_a32_mov_i(rd[0], 0, ctx);
 		break;
 	case BPF_DW:
 		/* Load a Double Word */
@@ -1359,6 +1364,11 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOV | BPF_X:
 		switch (BPF_SRC(code)) {
 		case BPF_X:
+			if (imm == 1) {
+				/* Special mov32 for zext */
+				emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
+				break;
+			}
 			emit_a32_mov_r64(is64, dst, src, ctx);
 			break;
 		case BPF_K:
@@ -1438,7 +1448,8 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 		}
 		emit_udivmod(rd_lo, rd_lo, rt, ctx, BPF_OP(code));
 		arm_bpf_put_reg32(dst_lo, rd_lo, ctx);
-		emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
 		break;
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_K:
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
@@ -1453,7 +1464,8 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 			return -EINVAL;
 		if (imm)
 			emit_a32_alu_i(dst_lo, imm, ctx, BPF_OP(code));
-		emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
 		break;
 	/* dst = dst << imm */
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_K:
@@ -1488,7 +1500,8 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 	/* dst = ~dst */
 	case BPF_ALU | BPF_NEG:
 		emit_a32_alu_i(dst_lo, 0, ctx, BPF_OP(code));
-		emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
+		if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+			emit_a32_mov_i(dst_hi, 0, ctx);
 		break;
 	/* dst = ~dst (64 bit) */
 	case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_NEG:
@@ -1544,11 +1557,13 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 #else /* ARMv6+ */
 			emit(ARM_UXTH(rd[1], rd[1]), ctx);
 #endif
-			emit(ARM_EOR_R(rd[0], rd[0], rd[0]), ctx);
+			if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+				emit(ARM_EOR_R(rd[0], rd[0], rd[0]), ctx);
 			break;
 		case 32:
 			/* zero-extend 32 bits into 64 bits */
-			emit(ARM_EOR_R(rd[0], rd[0], rd[0]), ctx);
+			if (!ctx->prog->aux->verifier_zext)
+				emit(ARM_EOR_R(rd[0], rd[0], rd[0]), ctx);
 			break;
 		case 64:
 			/* nop */
@@ -1838,6 +1853,11 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
 	/* Nothing to do here. We support Internal BPF. */
 }
 
+bool bpf_jit_needs_zext(void)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+
 struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
 {
 	struct bpf_prog *tmp, *orig_prog = prog;
-- 
2.7.4