bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [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	[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	[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 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 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 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 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

* 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).