From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/bpf: Fix detecting BPF atomic instructions
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 09:03:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQ+78iDs7N=8xA6BZVBnPx78Q-Ljp860nmb8cOq7V_6qtQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4117b430ffaa8cd7af042496f87fd7539e4f17fd.1625145429.git.naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
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?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-01 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
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 [this message]
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
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAADnVQ+78iDs7N=8xA6BZVBnPx78Q-Ljp860nmb8cOq7V_6qtQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).