* [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops @ 2021-07-01 15:08 Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions Naveen N. Rao ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bpf, linuxppc-dev Cc: Jiri Olsa, Michael Ellerman, Brendan Jackman, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann The first patch fixes an issue that causes a soft lockup on ppc64 with the BPF_ATOMIC bounds propagation verifier test. The second one updates ppc32 JIT to reject atomic operations properly. - Naveen Naveen N. Rao (2): powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c | 14 +++++++++++--- arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) base-commit: 086d9878e1092e7e69a69676ee9ec792690abb1d -- 2.31.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions 2021-07-01 15:08 [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 15:08 ` Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 16:03 ` Alexei Starovoitov 2021-07-02 10:26 ` Jiri Olsa 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-06 10:52 ` [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops Michael Ellerman 2 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bpf, linuxppc-dev Cc: Jiri Olsa, Michael Ellerman, Brendan Jackman, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and added a way to distinguish instructions based on the immediate field. Existing JIT implementations were updated to check for the immediate field and to reject programs utilizing anything more than BPF_ADD (such as BPF_FETCH) in the immediate field. However, the check added to powerpc64 JIT did not look at the correct BPF instruction. Due to this, such programs would be accepted and incorrectly JIT'ed resulting in soft lockups, as seen with the atomic bounds test. Fix this by looking at the correct immediate value. Fixes: 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other atomics in .imm") Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- Hi Jiri, FYI: I made a small change in this patch -- using 'imm' directly, rather than insn[i].imm. I've still added your Tested-by since this shouldn't impact the fix in any way. - Naveen arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c index 5cad5b5a7e9774..de8595880feec6 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c @@ -667,7 +667,7 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * * BPF_STX ATOMIC (atomic ops) */ case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_W: - if (insn->imm != BPF_ADD) { + if (imm != BPF_ADD) { pr_err_ratelimited( "eBPF filter atomic op code %02x (@%d) unsupported\n", code, i); @@ -689,7 +689,7 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * PPC_BCC_SHORT(COND_NE, tmp_idx); break; case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_DW: - if (insn->imm != BPF_ADD) { + if (imm != BPF_ADD) { pr_err_ratelimited( "eBPF filter atomic op code %02x (@%d) unsupported\n", code, i); -- 2.31.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 16:03 ` Alexei Starovoitov 2021-07-01 19:32 ` Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-02 10:26 ` Jiri Olsa 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2021-07-01 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naveen N. Rao Cc: bpf, ppc-dev, Jiri Olsa, Michael Ellerman, Brendan Jackman, Daniel Borkmann On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:09 AM Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other > atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and added a way to > distinguish instructions based on the immediate field. Existing JIT > implementations were updated to check for the immediate field and to > reject programs utilizing anything more than BPF_ADD (such as BPF_FETCH) > in the immediate field. > > However, the check added to powerpc64 JIT did not look at the correct > BPF instruction. Due to this, such programs would be accepted and > incorrectly JIT'ed resulting in soft lockups, as seen with the atomic > bounds test. Fix this by looking at the correct immediate value. > > Fixes: 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other atomics in .imm") > Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > Hi Jiri, > FYI: I made a small change in this patch -- using 'imm' directly, rather > than insn[i].imm. I've still added your Tested-by since this shouldn't > impact the fix in any way. > > - Naveen Excellent debugging! You guys are awesome. How do you want this fix routed? via bpf tree? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions 2021-07-01 16:03 ` Alexei Starovoitov @ 2021-07-01 19:32 ` Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 19:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: bpf, Daniel Borkmann, Brendan Jackman, Jiri Olsa, ppc-dev, Michael Ellerman Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:09 AM Naveen N. Rao > <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other >> atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and added a way to >> distinguish instructions based on the immediate field. Existing JIT >> implementations were updated to check for the immediate field and to >> reject programs utilizing anything more than BPF_ADD (such as BPF_FETCH) >> in the immediate field. >> >> However, the check added to powerpc64 JIT did not look at the correct >> BPF instruction. Due to this, such programs would be accepted and >> incorrectly JIT'ed resulting in soft lockups, as seen with the atomic >> bounds test. Fix this by looking at the correct immediate value. >> >> Fixes: 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other atomics in .imm") >> Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> >> Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> >> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> --- >> Hi Jiri, >> FYI: I made a small change in this patch -- using 'imm' directly, rather >> than insn[i].imm. I've still added your Tested-by since this shouldn't >> impact the fix in any way. >> >> - Naveen > > Excellent debugging! You guys are awesome. Thanks. Jiri and Brendan did the bulk of the work :) > How do you want this fix routed? via bpf tree? Michael has a few BPF patches queued up in powerpc tree for v5.14, so it might be easier to take these patches through the powerpc tree unless he feels otherwise. Michael? This also needs to be tagged for stable: Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.12+ - Naveen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions 2021-07-01 19:32 ` Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 19:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2021-07-01 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naveen N. Rao Cc: bpf, Daniel Borkmann, Brendan Jackman, Jiri Olsa, ppc-dev, Michael Ellerman On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 12:32 PM Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:09 AM Naveen N. Rao > > <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > >> > >> Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other > >> atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and added a way to > >> distinguish instructions based on the immediate field. Existing JIT > >> implementations were updated to check for the immediate field and to > >> reject programs utilizing anything more than BPF_ADD (such as BPF_FETCH) > >> in the immediate field. > >> > >> However, the check added to powerpc64 JIT did not look at the correct > >> BPF instruction. Due to this, such programs would be accepted and > >> incorrectly JIT'ed resulting in soft lockups, as seen with the atomic > >> bounds test. Fix this by looking at the correct immediate value. > >> > >> Fixes: 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other atomics in .imm") > >> Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > >> Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > >> --- > >> Hi Jiri, > >> FYI: I made a small change in this patch -- using 'imm' directly, rather > >> than insn[i].imm. I've still added your Tested-by since this shouldn't > >> impact the fix in any way. > >> > >> - Naveen > > > > Excellent debugging! You guys are awesome. > > Thanks. Jiri and Brendan did the bulk of the work :) > > > How do you want this fix routed? via bpf tree? > > Michael has a few BPF patches queued up in powerpc tree for v5.14, so it > might be easier to take these patches through the powerpc tree unless he > feels otherwise. Michael? Works for me. Thanks! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 16:03 ` Alexei Starovoitov @ 2021-07-02 10:26 ` Jiri Olsa 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Jiri Olsa @ 2021-07-02 10:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naveen N. Rao Cc: bpf, linuxppc-dev, Michael Ellerman, Brendan Jackman, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 08:38:58PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote: > Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other > atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and added a way to > distinguish instructions based on the immediate field. Existing JIT > implementations were updated to check for the immediate field and to > reject programs utilizing anything more than BPF_ADD (such as BPF_FETCH) > in the immediate field. > > However, the check added to powerpc64 JIT did not look at the correct > BPF instruction. Due to this, such programs would be accepted and > incorrectly JIT'ed resulting in soft lockups, as seen with the atomic > bounds test. Fix this by looking at the correct immediate value. > > Fixes: 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other atomics in .imm") > Reported-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > Hi Jiri, > FYI: I made a small change in this patch -- using 'imm' directly, rather > than insn[i].imm. I've still added your Tested-by since this shouldn't > impact the fix in any way. yep, it works nicely thanks jirka > > - Naveen > > > arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > index 5cad5b5a7e9774..de8595880feec6 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > @@ -667,7 +667,7 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * > * BPF_STX ATOMIC (atomic ops) > */ > case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_W: > - if (insn->imm != BPF_ADD) { > + if (imm != BPF_ADD) { > pr_err_ratelimited( > "eBPF filter atomic op code %02x (@%d) unsupported\n", > code, i); > @@ -689,7 +689,7 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * > PPC_BCC_SHORT(COND_NE, tmp_idx); > break; > case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_DW: > - if (insn->imm != BPF_ADD) { > + if (imm != BPF_ADD) { > pr_err_ratelimited( > "eBPF filter atomic op code %02x (@%d) unsupported\n", > code, i); > -- > 2.31.1 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT 2021-07-01 15:08 [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 15:08 ` Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 16:36 ` Christophe Leroy 2021-07-06 10:52 ` [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops Michael Ellerman 2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bpf, linuxppc-dev Cc: Jiri Olsa, Michael Ellerman, Brendan Jackman, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and updated all JIT implementations to reject JIT'ing instructions with an immediate value different from BPF_ADD. However, ppc32 BPF JIT was implemented around the same time and didn't include the same change. Update the ppc32 JIT accordingly. Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c | 14 +++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c index cbe5b399ed869d..91c990335a16c9 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c @@ -773,9 +773,17 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * break; /* - * BPF_STX XADD (atomic_add) + * BPF_STX ATOMIC (atomic ops) */ - case BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_W: /* *(u32 *)(dst + off) += src */ + case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_W: + if (imm != BPF_ADD) { + pr_err_ratelimited( + "eBPF filter atomic op code %02x (@%d) unsupported\n", code, i); + return -ENOTSUPP; + } + + /* *(u32 *)(dst + off) += src */ + bpf_set_seen_register(ctx, tmp_reg); /* Get offset into TMP_REG */ EMIT(PPC_RAW_LI(tmp_reg, off)); @@ -789,7 +797,7 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * PPC_BCC_SHORT(COND_NE, (ctx->idx - 3) * 4); break; - case BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_DW: /* *(u64 *)(dst + off) += src */ + case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_DW: /* *(u64 *)(dst + off) += src */ return -EOPNOTSUPP; /* -- 2.31.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 16:36 ` Christophe Leroy 2021-07-01 19:36 ` Naveen N. Rao 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Christophe Leroy @ 2021-07-01 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naveen N. Rao, bpf, linuxppc-dev Cc: Brendan Jackman, Jiri Olsa, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann Le 01/07/2021 à 17:08, Naveen N. Rao a écrit : > Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other > atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and updated all JIT > implementations to reject JIT'ing instructions with an immediate value > different from BPF_ADD. However, ppc32 BPF JIT was implemented around > the same time and didn't include the same change. Update the ppc32 JIT > accordingly. > > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Shouldn't it also include a Fixes tag and stable Cc as PPC32 eBPF was added in 5.13 ? Fixes: 51c66ad849a7 ("powerpc/bpf: Implement extended BPF on PPC32") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > --- > arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c > index cbe5b399ed869d..91c990335a16c9 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c > @@ -773,9 +773,17 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * > break; > > /* > - * BPF_STX XADD (atomic_add) > + * BPF_STX ATOMIC (atomic ops) > */ > - case BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_W: /* *(u32 *)(dst + off) += src */ > + case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_W: > + if (imm != BPF_ADD) { > + pr_err_ratelimited( > + "eBPF filter atomic op code %02x (@%d) unsupported\n", code, i); > + return -ENOTSUPP; > + } > + > + /* *(u32 *)(dst + off) += src */ > + > bpf_set_seen_register(ctx, tmp_reg); > /* Get offset into TMP_REG */ > EMIT(PPC_RAW_LI(tmp_reg, off)); > @@ -789,7 +797,7 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, struct codegen_context * > PPC_BCC_SHORT(COND_NE, (ctx->idx - 3) * 4); > break; > > - case BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_DW: /* *(u64 *)(dst + off) += src */ > + case BPF_STX | BPF_ATOMIC | BPF_DW: /* *(u64 *)(dst + off) += src */ > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > /* > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT 2021-07-01 16:36 ` Christophe Leroy @ 2021-07-01 19:36 ` Naveen N. Rao 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-01 19:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bpf, Christophe Leroy, linuxppc-dev Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Brendan Jackman, Jiri Olsa Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 01/07/2021 à 17:08, Naveen N. Rao a écrit : >> Commit 91c960b0056672 ("bpf: Rename BPF_XADD and prepare to encode other >> atomics in .imm") converted BPF_XADD to BPF_ATOMIC and updated all JIT >> implementations to reject JIT'ing instructions with an immediate value >> different from BPF_ADD. However, ppc32 BPF JIT was implemented around >> the same time and didn't include the same change. Update the ppc32 JIT >> accordingly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Shouldn't it also include a Fixes tag and stable Cc as PPC32 eBPF was added in 5.13 ? Yes, I wasn't sure which patch to actually blame. But you're right, this should have the below fixes tag since this affects the ppc32 eBPF JIT. > > Fixes: 51c66ad849a7 ("powerpc/bpf: Implement extended BPF on PPC32") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.13 Thanks, - Naveen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops 2021-07-01 15:08 [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT Naveen N. Rao @ 2021-07-06 10:52 ` Michael Ellerman 2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Michael Ellerman @ 2021-07-06 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naveen N. Rao, bpf, linuxppc-dev Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Jiri Olsa, Brendan Jackman, Michael Ellerman On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 20:38:57 +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote: > The first patch fixes an issue that causes a soft lockup on ppc64 with > the BPF_ATOMIC bounds propagation verifier test. The second one updates > ppc32 JIT to reject atomic operations properly. > > - Naveen > > Naveen N. Rao (2): > powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions > powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT > > [...] Applied to powerpc/fixes. [1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/419ac821766cbdb9fd85872bb3f1a589df05c94c [2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/307e5042c7bdae15308ef2e9b848833b84122eb0 cheers ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-07-06 10:52 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-07-01 15:08 [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 16:03 ` Alexei Starovoitov 2021-07-01 19:32 ` Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 19:33 ` Alexei Starovoitov 2021-07-02 10:26 ` Jiri Olsa 2021-07-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/bpf: Reject atomic ops in ppc32 JIT Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-01 16:36 ` Christophe Leroy 2021-07-01 19:36 ` Naveen N. Rao 2021-07-06 10:52 ` [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix issue with atomic ops Michael Ellerman
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).