Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f3d0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id a16csp861012pxv; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 23:24:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx/hbkE2EX+tSch/dmbgibpI2mubfAiorj5mrLubWbv6N2aMGltbfvmP0lNG8DtsEjl9Xmy X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:109:: with SMTP id t9mr6256043ilm.235.1624602256269; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 23:24:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1624602256; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=AV9MHMqeapiH1mRGDnU8/c/FtrcR6Af+yBmye0ql502YNc5+HUY2mpVvziszMgekWf I3NDEfuPgUMXs+ykJ83ffELs3eiGcxKmQhw0nyz5+4NvSIGJKTruKUHMCCYA9bcA6AG/ bUw5umpe+lSFE3he3URwH9iEz0WMa7DfFGvF5Fa5Jez4cpWKR20enbk2U8VPteb2IHX/ 0zRpzCaE+Vq7jJAN1gx1kQiJ3oK3MoGAF6LGZqbj4Fn5nOE3mFagCtx2gq06c1CpNA/9 UVNn+50ol5cxx4vMz6y0ph6PrZsgFIcNlp17M2zbwZ6jXSxwjvG51G1TPH7fKV1nsgrd 19PQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:references:cc :to:subject:from:dkim-signature; bh=uVsRWEvCgZ0OGgHhSqkUOMwkE8AprqcvcntIio0357g=; b=INZ19iZBJwhzw1LBoij0BTx8FM0sgolvBdrQ3xLtDW7vpMm36SqBxf16VtNL/3ePY5 IUvykZWFGT+NOr0HqXQaPUHwBrHTyJplemZ4XS23wT7clAzQ/IrpNpZjzfN45NmKbTGX Y0Io81dVl8tiw2wjCq4W4d0bTEcQxRnjtGbwlqWyKsz1e+b2I55jM1ZuuOtE3+d8UO64 JXoOwkUFtoq/a1kgJ5+wbCTnwwMn4s2Z10B0oqEIiu0XY01W1Y56OY8jtGECmPjIjO8V V5vFDr8AKo/MJpCyT84u1Yg5snAmjo7+e7RX0b6BeT9Xoy8h6RWWcJJVUPC9faU9hLlb /dsA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=X6LjzBfw; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x6si5191614iol.30.2021.06.24.23.24.04; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 23:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=X6LjzBfw; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233182AbhFYGZg (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 02:25:36 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:50108 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230192AbhFYGZg (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 02:25:36 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 15P63m3W101873; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 02:22:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : subject : to : cc : references : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=uVsRWEvCgZ0OGgHhSqkUOMwkE8AprqcvcntIio0357g=; b=X6LjzBfwyZiEQNIHA1KJyzCYKHKHWLiDnoWvN3cZH0G1wsWyniH+K6XqNNmr6i7K4onG kI/FoqrQDlkywPaUhnPGoQ10dwwvnzZzl8ivrZsGhbjPS21WXwr0QFrwO2CUO0gp3BIa dO9zoA6rIJMwxiHfE2ZsVAxxsLNAhIDz/3gTEylDe9SKb28WzZHRamw9fASZG6T4/L1S nHQ5d3FNvOzsCCu0RTJl/mmstSvhWdbbMVX7CSHNVsj/C8e9x230nx6ajuKYvbrVPupf 1AWFILEGHGoLlyQKGQUWTd6wbF85CGeRyrSvVS4SPoufKsM+GbmkUenno8ndzfRqC4Qo /A== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 39d8cn2dac-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 02:22:39 -0400 Received: from m0098420.ppops.net (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 15P64Wbh107556; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 02:22:39 -0400 Received: from ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (6a.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.106]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 39d8cn2d9t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 02:22:38 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 15P672NX001791; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:22:37 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 399878skf6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:22:36 +0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 15P6MYCX24379898 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:22:34 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BE0EA404D; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:22:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310CEA4040; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:22:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.199.35.17] (unknown [9.199.35.17]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:22:25 +0000 (GMT) From: Ravi Bangoria Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 bpf: Fix extable offset calculation To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , "David S. Miller" , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , David Ahern , Daniel Borkmann , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , X86 ML , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Network Development , bpf , LKML , "Naveen N. Rao" , Ravi Bangoria References: <20210622110026.1157847-1-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com> Message-ID: <960b5e26-e97d-2b1a-4628-df8525c0728b@linux.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 11:52:24 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 6VtCpoh8XxZSvcgk4ewT25AeG1ziBwNy X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: bUC8hsl5fQCzVMerhgo_r0EnidDR65GM X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.790 definitions=2021-06-25_01:2021-06-24,2021-06-25 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2106250034 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 6/25/21 9:31 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 4:01 AM Ravi Bangoria > wrote: >> >> commit 4c5de127598e1 ("bpf: Emit explicit NULL pointer checks >> for PROBE_LDX instructions.") is emitting couple of instructions >> before actual load. Consider those additional instructions while >> calculating extable offset. >> >> Fixes: 4c5de127598e1 ("bpf: Emit explicit NULL pointer checks for PROBE_LDX instructions.") >> Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria >> --- >> arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c >> index 2a2e290fa5d8..231a8178cc11 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c >> @@ -1297,7 +1297,7 @@ st: if (is_imm8(insn->off)) >> emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_SIZE(insn->code), dst_reg, src_reg, insn->off); >> if (BPF_MODE(insn->code) == BPF_PROBE_MEM) { >> struct exception_table_entry *ex; >> - u8 *_insn = image + proglen; >> + u8 *_insn = image + proglen + (u8)(start_of_ldx - temp); > > Great debugging and the fix. Thanks a lot. > I've dropped (u8) cast, kept (), and applied to bpf tree. > I think it looks cleaner without that cast. Thanks. > Could you send a followup patch with a selftest, so I don't make > the same mistake again ? ;) Unfortunately extable gets involved only for bad kernel pointers and ideally there should not be any bad pointer in kernel. So there is no easy way to create a proper selftest for this. Ravi