Re: [PATCH bpf v2] bpf, riscv: clear high 32 bits for ALU32 add/sub/neg/lsh/rsh/arsh
From: Björn Töpel <hidden>
Date: 2019-05-31 08:17:03
Also in:
bpf, linux-riscv, lkml
On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 01:08, Song Liu [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 3:30 PM Luke Nelson [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
In BPF, 32-bit ALU operations should zero-extend their results into the 64-bit registers. The current BPF JIT on RISC-V emits incorrect instructions that perform sign extension only (e.g., addw, subw) on 32-bit add, sub, lsh, rsh, arsh, and neg. This behavior diverges from the interpreter and JITs for other architectures. This patch fixes the bugs by performing zero extension on the destination register of 32-bit ALU operations. Fixes: 2353ecc6f91f ("bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G") Cc: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Luke Nelson <luke.r.nels@gmail.com>Acked-by: Song Liu <redacted>
Luke, thanks for fixing this! Nice work! Acked-by: Björn Töpel <redacted>
quoted
--- The original patch is https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/30/1370 This version is rebased against the bpf tree. --- arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c index e5c8d675bd6e..426d5c33ea90 100644 --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c@@ -751,10 +751,14 @@ static int emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, case BPF_ALU | BPF_ADD | BPF_X: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ADD | BPF_X: emit(is64 ? rv_add(rd, rd, rs) : rv_addw(rd, rd, rs), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; case BPF_ALU | BPF_SUB | BPF_X: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_SUB | BPF_X: emit(is64 ? rv_sub(rd, rd, rs) : rv_subw(rd, rd, rs), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; case BPF_ALU | BPF_AND | BPF_X: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_AND | BPF_X:@@ -795,14 +799,20 @@ static int emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, case BPF_ALU | BPF_LSH | BPF_X: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_X: emit(is64 ? rv_sll(rd, rd, rs) : rv_sllw(rd, rd, rs), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; case BPF_ALU | BPF_RSH | BPF_X: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_X: emit(is64 ? rv_srl(rd, rd, rs) : rv_srlw(rd, rd, rs), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; case BPF_ALU | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X: emit(is64 ? rv_sra(rd, rd, rs) : rv_sraw(rd, rd, rs), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; /* dst = -dst */@@ -810,6 +820,8 @@ static int emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_NEG: emit(is64 ? rv_sub(rd, RV_REG_ZERO, rd) : rv_subw(rd, RV_REG_ZERO, rd), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; /* dst = BSWAP##imm(dst) */@@ -964,14 +976,20 @@ static int emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, case BPF_ALU | BPF_LSH | BPF_K: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_K: emit(is64 ? rv_slli(rd, rd, imm) : rv_slliw(rd, rd, imm), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; case BPF_ALU | BPF_RSH | BPF_K: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_K: emit(is64 ? rv_srli(rd, rd, imm) : rv_srliw(rd, rd, imm), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; case BPF_ALU | BPF_ARSH | BPF_K: case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_K: emit(is64 ? rv_srai(rd, rd, imm) : rv_sraiw(rd, rd, imm), ctx); + if (!is64) + emit_zext_32(rd, ctx); break; /* JUMP off */ --2.19.1