diff options
author | Alexei Starovoitov | 2017-10-03 15:37:20 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | David S. Miller | 2017-10-03 16:04:44 -0700 |
commit | 90caccdd8cc0215705f18b92771b449b01e2474a (patch) | |
tree | 8d091b5f97b4c15bf8127a48edd6bc4151374dac /arch/x86 | |
parent | 05946876f0c16f6fe1db692d575aba42b25f0811 (diff) |
bpf: fix bpf_tail_call() x64 JIT
- bpf prog_array just like all other types of bpf array accepts 32-bit index.
Clarify that in the comment.
- fix x64 JIT of bpf_tail_call which was incorrectly loading 8 instead of 4 bytes
- tighten corresponding check in the interpreter to stay consistent
The JIT bug can be triggered after introduction of BPF_F_NUMA_NODE flag
in commit 96eabe7a40aa in 4.14. Before that the map_flags would stay zero and
though JIT code is wrong it will check bounds correctly.
Hence two fixes tags. All other JITs don't have this problem.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Fixes: 96eabe7a40aa ("bpf: Allow selecting numa node during map creation")
Fixes: b52f00e6a715 ("x86: bpf_jit: implement bpf_tail_call() helper")
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/x86')
-rw-r--r-- | arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c index 8c9573660d51..0554e8aef4d5 100644 --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c @@ -284,9 +284,9 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call(u8 **pprog) /* if (index >= array->map.max_entries) * goto out; */ - EMIT4(0x48, 0x8B, 0x46, /* mov rax, qword ptr [rsi + 16] */ + EMIT2(0x89, 0xD2); /* mov edx, edx */ + EMIT3(0x39, 0x56, /* cmp dword ptr [rsi + 16], edx */ offsetof(struct bpf_array, map.max_entries)); - EMIT3(0x48, 0x39, 0xD0); /* cmp rax, rdx */ #define OFFSET1 43 /* number of bytes to jump */ EMIT2(X86_JBE, OFFSET1); /* jbe out */ label1 = cnt; |