Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

powerpc/bpf: Various fixes #1865

Closed
wants to merge 10 commits into from
Closed

powerpc/bpf: Various fixes #1865

wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

kernel-patches-bot
Copy link

Pull request for series with
subject: powerpc/bpf: Various fixes
version: 1
url: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=556517

Nobody and others added 10 commits October 1, 2021 14:23
…ch range

Add a helper to check if a given offset is within the branch range for a
powerpc conditional branch instruction, and update some sites to use the
new helper.

Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Add checks to ensure that we never emit branch instructions with
truncated branch offsets.

Suggested-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
SEEN_STACK is unused on PowerPC. Remove it. Also, have
SEEN_TAILCALL use 0x40000000.

Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
In some scenarios, it is possible that the program epilogue is outside
the branch range for a BPF_EXIT instruction. Instead of rejecting such
programs, emit an indirect branch. We track the size of the bpf program
emitted after the initial run and do a second pass since BPF_EXIT can
end up emitting different number of instructions depending on the
program size.

Suggested-by: Jordan Niethe <jniethe5@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Only ignore the operation if dividing by 1.

Fixes: 156d0e2 ("powerpc/ebpf/jit: Implement JIT compiler for extended BPF")
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
We aren't handling subtraction involving an immediate value of
0x80000000 properly. Fix the same.

Fixes: 156d0e2 ("powerpc/ebpf/jit: Implement JIT compiler for extended BPF")
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Johan reported the below crash with test_bpf on ppc64 e5500:

  test_bpf: #296 ALU_END_FROM_LE 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301 jited:1
  Oops: Exception in kernel mode, sig: 4 [#1]
  BE PAGE_SIZE=4K SMP NR_CPUS=24 QEMU e500
  Modules linked in: test_bpf(+)
  CPU: 0 PID: 76 Comm: insmod Not tainted 5.14.0-03771-g98c2059e008a-dirty #1
  NIP:  8000000000061c3c LR: 80000000006dea64 CTR: 8000000000061c18
  REGS: c0000000032d3420 TRAP: 0700   Not tainted (5.14.0-03771-g98c2059e008a-dirty)
  MSR:  0000000080089000 <EE,ME>  CR: 88002822  XER: 20000000 IRQMASK: 0
  <...>
  NIP [8000000000061c3c] 0x8000000000061c3c
  LR [80000000006dea64] .__run_one+0x104/0x17c [test_bpf]
  Call Trace:
   .__run_one+0x60/0x17c [test_bpf] (unreliable)
   .test_bpf_init+0x6a8/0xdc8 [test_bpf]
   .do_one_initcall+0x6c/0x28c
   .do_init_module+0x68/0x28c
   .load_module+0x2460/0x2abc
   .__do_sys_init_module+0x120/0x18c
   .system_call_exception+0x110/0x1b8
   system_call_common+0xf0/0x210
  --- interrupt: c00 at 0x101d0acc
  <...>
  ---[ end trace 47b2bf19090bb3d0 ]---

  Illegal instruction

The illegal instruction turned out to be 'ldbrx' emitted for
BPF_FROM_[L|B]E, which was only introduced in ISA v2.06. Guard use of
the same and implement an alternative approach for older processors.

Fixes: 156d0e2 ("powerpc/ebpf/jit: Implement JIT compiler for extended BPF")
Reported-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Add a helper to return the stf_barrier type for the current processor.

Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Emit similar instruction sequences to commit a048a07
("powerpc/64s: Add support for a store forwarding barrier at kernel
entry/exit") when encountering BPF_NOSPEC.

Mitigations are enabled depending on what the firmware advertises. In
particular, we do not gate these mitigations based on current settings,
just like in x86. Due to this, we don't need to take any action if
mitigations are enabled or disabled at runtime.

Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: b0e875b
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=556517
version: 1

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

At least one diff in series https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=556517 irrelevant now. Closing PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
2 participants