| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20211007143006.634308-1-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2021 16:30:06 +0200
From: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@...finetworks.com>
To: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org
Cc: kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@...finetworks.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, tests: Add more LD_IMM64 tests
This patch adds new tests for the two-instruction LD_IMM64. The new tests
verify the operation with immediate values of different byte patterns.
Mainly intended to cover JITs that want to be clever when loading 64-bit
constants.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@...finetworks.com>
---
lib/test_bpf.c | 120 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 117 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/test_bpf.c b/lib/test_bpf.c
index b9fc330fc83b..e5b10fdefab5 100644
--- a/lib/test_bpf.c
+++ b/lib/test_bpf.c
@@ -2134,7 +2134,7 @@ static int bpf_fill_atomic32_cmpxchg_reg_pairs(struct bpf_test *self)
* of the immediate value. This is often the case if the native instruction
* immediate field width is narrower than 32 bits.
*/
-static int bpf_fill_ld_imm64(struct bpf_test *self)
+static int bpf_fill_ld_imm64_magn(struct bpf_test *self)
{
int block = 64; /* Increase for more tests per MSB position */
int len = 3 + 8 * 63 * block * 2;
@@ -2180,6 +2180,88 @@ static int bpf_fill_ld_imm64(struct bpf_test *self)
return 0;
}
+/*
+ * Test the two-instruction 64-bit immediate load operation for different
+ * combinations of bytes. Each byte in the 64-bit word is constructed as
+ * (base & mask) | (rand() & ~mask), where rand() is a deterministic LCG.
+ * All patterns (base1, mask1) and (base2, mask2) bytes are tested.
+ */
+static int __bpf_fill_ld_imm64_bytes(struct bpf_test *self,
+ u8 base1, u8 mask1,
+ u8 base2, u8 mask2)
+{
+ struct bpf_insn *insn;
+ int len = 3 + 8 * BIT(8);
+ int pattern, index;
+ u32 rand = 1;
+ int i = 0;
+
+ insn = kmalloc_array(len, sizeof(*insn), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!insn)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0);
+
+ for (pattern = 0; pattern < BIT(8); pattern++) {
+ u64 imm = 0;
+
+ for (index = 0; index < 8; index++) {
+ int byte;
+
+ if (pattern & BIT(index))
+ byte = (base1 & mask1) | (rand & ~mask1);
+ else
+ byte = (base2 & mask2) | (rand & ~mask2);
+ imm = (imm << 8) | byte;
+ }
+
+ /* Update our LCG */
+ rand = rand * 1664525 + 1013904223;
+
+ /* Perform operation */
+ i += __bpf_ld_imm64(&insn[i], R1, imm);
+
+ /* Load reference */
+ insn[i++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R2, imm);
+ insn[i++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R3, (u32)(imm >> 32));
+ insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, R3, 32);
+ insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_OR, R2, R3);
+
+ /* Check result */
+ insn[i++] = BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JEQ, R1, R2, 1);
+ insn[i++] = BPF_EXIT_INSN();
+ }
+
+ insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 1);
+ insn[i++] = BPF_EXIT_INSN();
+
+ self->u.ptr.insns = insn;
+ self->u.ptr.len = len;
+ BUG_ON(i != len);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int bpf_fill_ld_imm64_checker(struct bpf_test *self)
+{
+ return __bpf_fill_ld_imm64_bytes(self, 0, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff);
+}
+
+static int bpf_fill_ld_imm64_pos_neg(struct bpf_test *self)
+{
+ return __bpf_fill_ld_imm64_bytes(self, 1, 0x81, 0x80, 0x80);
+}
+
+static int bpf_fill_ld_imm64_pos_zero(struct bpf_test *self)
+{
+ return __bpf_fill_ld_imm64_bytes(self, 1, 0x81, 0, 0xff);
+}
+
+static int bpf_fill_ld_imm64_neg_zero(struct bpf_test *self)
+{
+ return __bpf_fill_ld_imm64_bytes(self, 0x80, 0x80, 0, 0xff);
+}
+
/*
* Exhaustive tests of JMP operations for all combinations of power-of-two
* magnitudes of the operands, both for positive and negative values. The
@@ -12401,14 +12483,46 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.fill_helper = bpf_fill_alu32_mod_reg,
.nr_testruns = NR_PATTERN_RUNS,
},
- /* LD_IMM64 immediate magnitudes */
+ /* LD_IMM64 immediate magnitudes and byte patterns */
{
"LD_IMM64: all immediate value magnitudes",
{ },
INTERNAL | FLAG_NO_DATA,
{ },
{ { 0, 1 } },
- .fill_helper = bpf_fill_ld_imm64,
+ .fill_helper = bpf_fill_ld_imm64_magn,
+ },
+ {
+ "LD_IMM64: checker byte patterns",
+ { },
+ INTERNAL | FLAG_NO_DATA,
+ { },
+ { { 0, 1 } },
+ .fill_helper = bpf_fill_ld_imm64_checker,
+ },
+ {
+ "LD_IMM64: random positive and zero byte patterns",
+ { },
+ INTERNAL | FLAG_NO_DATA,
+ { },
+ { { 0, 1 } },
+ .fill_helper = bpf_fill_ld_imm64_pos_zero,
+ },
+ {
+ "LD_IMM64: random negative and zero byte patterns",
+ { },
+ INTERNAL | FLAG_NO_DATA,
+ { },
+ { { 0, 1 } },
+ .fill_helper = bpf_fill_ld_imm64_neg_zero,
+ },
+ {
+ "LD_IMM64: random positive and negative byte patterns",
+ { },
+ INTERNAL | FLAG_NO_DATA,
+ { },
+ { { 0, 1 } },
+ .fill_helper = bpf_fill_ld_imm64_pos_neg,
},
/* 64-bit ATOMIC register combinations */
{
--
2.30.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists