From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 22:21:38 +0000 (-0800) Subject: 4.9-stable patches X-Git-Tag: v3.18.99~6 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=1602c9f37d9ee1db17db93426078c1de99c5553a;p=thirdparty%2Fkernel%2Fstable-queue.git 4.9-stable patches added patches: bpf-add-schedule-points-in-percpu-arrays-management.patch bpf-arm64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch bpf-fix-mlock-precharge-on-arraymaps.patch bpf-fix-wrong-exposure-of-map_flags-into-fdinfo-for-lpm.patch bpf-ppc64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch bpf-x64-implement-retpoline-for-tail-call.patch --- diff --git a/queue-4.9/bpf-add-schedule-points-in-percpu-arrays-management.patch b/queue-4.9/bpf-add-schedule-points-in-percpu-arrays-management.patch new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..b2959af9221 --- /dev/null +++ b/queue-4.9/bpf-add-schedule-points-in-percpu-arrays-management.patch @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +From foo@baz Fri Mar 9 14:20:51 PST 2018 +From: Daniel Borkmann +Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:17:36 +0100 +Subject: bpf: add schedule points in percpu arrays management +To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org +Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, stable@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet +Message-ID: <2f5704af2bdf05e8eae92917e2aeaec49d5477c9.1520521792.git.daniel@iogearbox.net> + +From: Eric Dumazet + +[ upstream commit 32fff239de37ef226d5b66329dd133f64d63b22d ] + +syszbot managed to trigger RCU detected stalls in +bpf_array_free_percpu() + +It takes time to allocate a huge percpu map, but even more time to free +it. + +Since we run in process context, use cond_resched() to yield cpu if +needed. + +Fixes: a10423b87a7e ("bpf: introduce BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY map") +Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet +Reported-by: syzbot +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman +--- + kernel/bpf/arraymap.c | 5 ++++- + 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) + +--- a/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c ++++ b/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c +@@ -20,8 +20,10 @@ static void bpf_array_free_percpu(struct + { + int i; + +- for (i = 0; i < array->map.max_entries; i++) ++ for (i = 0; i < array->map.max_entries; i++) { + free_percpu(array->pptrs[i]); ++ cond_resched(); ++ } + } + + static int bpf_array_alloc_percpu(struct bpf_array *array) +@@ -37,6 +39,7 @@ static int bpf_array_alloc_percpu(struct + return -ENOMEM; + } + array->pptrs[i] = ptr; ++ cond_resched(); + } + + return 0; diff --git a/queue-4.9/bpf-arm64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch b/queue-4.9/bpf-arm64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..6d35b9bd2c7 --- /dev/null +++ b/queue-4.9/bpf-arm64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ +From foo@baz Fri Mar 9 14:20:51 PST 2018 +From: Daniel Borkmann +Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:17:35 +0100 +Subject: bpf, arm64: fix out of bounds access in tail call +To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org +Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, stable@vger.kernel.org +Message-ID: <3e884789ba211b116935a7c05044b861aba2a30e.1520521792.git.daniel@iogearbox.net> + +From: Daniel Borkmann + +[ upstream commit 16338a9b3ac30740d49f5dfed81bac0ffa53b9c7 ] + +I recently noticed a crash on arm64 when feeding a bogus index +into BPF tail call helper. The crash would not occur when the +interpreter is used, but only in case of JIT. Output looks as +follows: + + [ 347.007486] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address fffb850e96492510 + [...] + [ 347.043065] [fffb850e96492510] address between user and kernel address ranges + [ 347.050205] Internal error: Oops: 96000004 [#1] SMP + [...] + [ 347.190829] x13: 0000000000000000 x12: 0000000000000000 + [ 347.196128] x11: fffc047ebe782800 x10: ffff808fd7d0fd10 + [ 347.201427] x9 : 0000000000000000 x8 : 0000000000000000 + [ 347.206726] x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 001c991738000000 + [ 347.212025] x5 : 0000000000000018 x4 : 000000000000ba5a + [ 347.217325] x3 : 00000000000329c4 x2 : ffff808fd7cf0500 + [ 347.222625] x1 : ffff808fd7d0fc00 x0 : ffff808fd7cf0500 + [ 347.227926] Process test_verifier (pid: 4548, stack limit = 0x000000007467fa61) + [ 347.235221] Call trace: + [ 347.237656] 0xffff000002f3a4fc + [ 347.240784] bpf_test_run+0x78/0xf8 + [ 347.244260] bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x148/0x230 + [ 347.248694] SyS_bpf+0x77c/0x1110 + [ 347.251999] el0_svc_naked+0x30/0x34 + [ 347.255564] Code: 9100075a d280220a 8b0a002a d37df04b (f86b694b) + [...] + +In this case the index used in BPF r3 is the same as in r1 +at the time of the call, meaning we fed a pointer as index; +here, it had the value 0xffff808fd7cf0500 which sits in x2. + +While I found tail calls to be working in general (also for +hitting the error cases), I noticed the following in the code +emission: + + # bpftool p d j i 988 + [...] + 38: ldr w10, [x1,x10] + 3c: cmp w2, w10 + 40: b.ge 0x000000000000007c <-- signed cmp + 44: mov x10, #0x20 // #32 + 48: cmp x26, x10 + 4c: b.gt 0x000000000000007c + 50: add x26, x26, #0x1 + 54: mov x10, #0x110 // #272 + 58: add x10, x1, x10 + 5c: lsl x11, x2, #3 + 60: ldr x11, [x10,x11] <-- faulting insn (f86b694b) + 64: cbz x11, 0x000000000000007c + [...] + +Meaning, the tests passed because commit ddb55992b04d ("arm64: +bpf: implement bpf_tail_call() helper") was using signed compares +instead of unsigned which as a result had the test wrongly passing. + +Change this but also the tail call count test both into unsigned +and cap the index as u32. Latter we did as well in 90caccdd8cc0 +("bpf: fix bpf_tail_call() x64 JIT") and is needed in addition here, +too. Tested on HiSilicon Hi1616. + +Result after patch: + + # bpftool p d j i 268 + [...] + 38: ldr w10, [x1,x10] + 3c: add w2, w2, #0x0 + 40: cmp w2, w10 + 44: b.cs 0x0000000000000080 + 48: mov x10, #0x20 // #32 + 4c: cmp x26, x10 + 50: b.hi 0x0000000000000080 + 54: add x26, x26, #0x1 + 58: mov x10, #0x110 // #272 + 5c: add x10, x1, x10 + 60: lsl x11, x2, #3 + 64: ldr x11, [x10,x11] + 68: cbz x11, 0x0000000000000080 + [...] + +Fixes: ddb55992b04d ("arm64: bpf: implement bpf_tail_call() helper") +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman +--- + arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 5 +++-- + 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) + +--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c ++++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c +@@ -234,8 +234,9 @@ static int emit_bpf_tail_call(struct jit + off = offsetof(struct bpf_array, map.max_entries); + emit_a64_mov_i64(tmp, off, ctx); + emit(A64_LDR32(tmp, r2, tmp), ctx); ++ emit(A64_MOV(0, r3, r3), ctx); + emit(A64_CMP(0, r3, tmp), ctx); +- emit(A64_B_(A64_COND_GE, jmp_offset), ctx); ++ emit(A64_B_(A64_COND_CS, jmp_offset), ctx); + + /* if (tail_call_cnt > MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT) + * goto out; +@@ -243,7 +244,7 @@ static int emit_bpf_tail_call(struct jit + */ + emit_a64_mov_i64(tmp, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT, ctx); + emit(A64_CMP(1, tcc, tmp), ctx); +- emit(A64_B_(A64_COND_GT, jmp_offset), ctx); ++ emit(A64_B_(A64_COND_HI, jmp_offset), ctx); + emit(A64_ADD_I(1, tcc, tcc, 1), ctx); + + /* prog = array->ptrs[index]; diff --git a/queue-4.9/bpf-fix-mlock-precharge-on-arraymaps.patch b/queue-4.9/bpf-fix-mlock-precharge-on-arraymaps.patch new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..e1cd35f0618 --- /dev/null +++ b/queue-4.9/bpf-fix-mlock-precharge-on-arraymaps.patch @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ +From foo@baz Fri Mar 9 14:20:51 PST 2018 +From: Daniel Borkmann +Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:17:33 +0100 +Subject: bpf: fix mlock precharge on arraymaps +To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org +Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, stable@vger.kernel.org, Dennis Zhou +Message-ID: <56632230ccbd31f06f33af4c6ac9fcbc88506825.1520521792.git.daniel@iogearbox.net> + +From: Daniel Borkmann + +[ upstream commit 9c2d63b843a5c8a8d0559cc067b5398aa5ec3ffc ] + +syzkaller recently triggered OOM during percpu map allocation; +while there is work in progress by Dennis Zhou to add __GFP_NORETRY +semantics for percpu allocator under pressure, there seems also a +missing bpf_map_precharge_memlock() check in array map allocation. + +Given today the actual bpf_map_charge_memlock() happens after the +find_and_alloc_map() in syscall path, the bpf_map_precharge_memlock() +is there to bail out early before we go and do the map setup work +when we find that we hit the limits anyway. Therefore add this for +array map as well. + +Fixes: 6c9059817432 ("bpf: pre-allocate hash map elements") +Fixes: a10423b87a7e ("bpf: introduce BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY map") +Reported-by: syzbot+adb03f3f0bb57ce3acda@syzkaller.appspotmail.com +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Cc: Dennis Zhou +Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman +--- + kernel/bpf/arraymap.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++----------- + 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) + +--- a/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c ++++ b/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c +@@ -48,8 +48,9 @@ static struct bpf_map *array_map_alloc(u + bool percpu = attr->map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY; + u32 elem_size, index_mask, max_entries; + bool unpriv = !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN); ++ u64 cost, array_size, mask64; + struct bpf_array *array; +- u64 array_size, mask64; ++ int ret; + + /* check sanity of attributes */ + if (attr->max_entries == 0 || attr->key_size != 4 || +@@ -92,8 +93,19 @@ static struct bpf_map *array_map_alloc(u + array_size += (u64) max_entries * elem_size; + + /* make sure there is no u32 overflow later in round_up() */ +- if (array_size >= U32_MAX - PAGE_SIZE) ++ cost = array_size; ++ if (cost >= U32_MAX - PAGE_SIZE) + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); ++ if (percpu) { ++ cost += (u64)attr->max_entries * elem_size * num_possible_cpus(); ++ if (cost >= U32_MAX - PAGE_SIZE) ++ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); ++ } ++ cost = round_up(cost, PAGE_SIZE) >> PAGE_SHIFT; ++ ++ ret = bpf_map_precharge_memlock(cost); ++ if (ret < 0) ++ return ERR_PTR(ret); + + /* allocate all map elements and zero-initialize them */ + array = bpf_map_area_alloc(array_size); +@@ -108,20 +120,15 @@ static struct bpf_map *array_map_alloc(u + array->map.value_size = attr->value_size; + array->map.max_entries = attr->max_entries; + array->map.map_flags = attr->map_flags; ++ array->map.pages = cost; + array->elem_size = elem_size; + +- if (!percpu) +- goto out; +- +- array_size += (u64) attr->max_entries * elem_size * num_possible_cpus(); +- +- if (array_size >= U32_MAX - PAGE_SIZE || +- elem_size > PCPU_MIN_UNIT_SIZE || bpf_array_alloc_percpu(array)) { ++ if (percpu && ++ (elem_size > PCPU_MIN_UNIT_SIZE || ++ bpf_array_alloc_percpu(array))) { + bpf_map_area_free(array); + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); + } +-out: +- array->map.pages = round_up(array_size, PAGE_SIZE) >> PAGE_SHIFT; + + return &array->map; + } diff --git a/queue-4.9/bpf-fix-wrong-exposure-of-map_flags-into-fdinfo-for-lpm.patch b/queue-4.9/bpf-fix-wrong-exposure-of-map_flags-into-fdinfo-for-lpm.patch new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..3a6fad06ed2 --- /dev/null +++ b/queue-4.9/bpf-fix-wrong-exposure-of-map_flags-into-fdinfo-for-lpm.patch @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +From foo@baz Fri Mar 9 14:20:51 PST 2018 +From: Daniel Borkmann +Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:17:32 +0100 +Subject: bpf: fix wrong exposure of map_flags into fdinfo for lpm +To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org +Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, stable@vger.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" +Message-ID: + +From: Daniel Borkmann + +[ upstream commit a316338cb71a3260201490e615f2f6d5c0d8fb2c ] + +trie_alloc() always needs to have BPF_F_NO_PREALLOC passed in via +attr->map_flags, since it does not support preallocation yet. We +check the flag, but we never copy the flag into trie->map.map_flags, +which is later on exposed into fdinfo and used by loaders such as +iproute2. Latter uses this in bpf_map_selfcheck_pinned() to test +whether a pinned map has the same spec as the one from the BPF obj +file and if not, bails out, which is currently the case for lpm +since it exposes always 0 as flags. + +Also copy over flags in array_map_alloc() and stack_map_alloc(). +They always have to be 0 right now, but we should make sure to not +miss to copy them over at a later point in time when we add actual +flags for them to use. + +Fixes: b95a5c4db09b ("bpf: add a longest prefix match trie map implementation") +Reported-by: Jarno Rajahalme +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov +Signed-off-by: David S. Miller +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman +--- + kernel/bpf/arraymap.c | 1 + + kernel/bpf/stackmap.c | 1 + + 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) + +--- a/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c ++++ b/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c +@@ -107,6 +107,7 @@ static struct bpf_map *array_map_alloc(u + array->map.key_size = attr->key_size; + array->map.value_size = attr->value_size; + array->map.max_entries = attr->max_entries; ++ array->map.map_flags = attr->map_flags; + array->elem_size = elem_size; + + if (!percpu) +--- a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c ++++ b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c +@@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ static struct bpf_map *stack_map_alloc(u + smap->map.key_size = attr->key_size; + smap->map.value_size = value_size; + smap->map.max_entries = attr->max_entries; ++ smap->map.map_flags = attr->map_flags; + smap->n_buckets = n_buckets; + smap->map.pages = round_up(cost, PAGE_SIZE) >> PAGE_SHIFT; + diff --git a/queue-4.9/bpf-ppc64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch b/queue-4.9/bpf-ppc64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..89b5d1399c6 --- /dev/null +++ b/queue-4.9/bpf-ppc64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@ +From foo@baz Fri Mar 9 14:20:51 PST 2018 +From: Daniel Borkmann +Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:17:37 +0100 +Subject: bpf, ppc64: fix out of bounds access in tail call +To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org +Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, stable@vger.kernel.org +Message-ID: <08bc9e5902de0e9e9b26194ba4ea219f053b7206.1520521792.git.daniel@iogearbox.net> + +From: Daniel Borkmann + +[ upstream commit d269176e766c71c998cb75b4ea8cbc321cc0019d ] + +While working on 16338a9b3ac3 ("bpf, arm64: fix out of bounds access in +tail call") I noticed that ppc64 JIT is partially affected as well. While +the bound checking is correctly performed as unsigned comparison, the +register with the index value however, is never truncated into 32 bit +space, so e.g. a index value of 0x100000000ULL with a map of 1 element +would pass with PPC_CMPLW() whereas we later on continue with the full +64 bit register value. Therefore, as we do in interpreter and other JITs +truncate the value to 32 bit initially in order to fix access. + +Fixes: ce0761419fae ("powerpc/bpf: Implement support for tail calls") +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Reviewed-by: Naveen N. Rao +Tested-by: Naveen N. Rao +Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman +--- + arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 1 + + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) + +--- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c ++++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c +@@ -245,6 +245,7 @@ static void bpf_jit_emit_tail_call(u32 * + * goto out; + */ + PPC_LWZ(b2p[TMP_REG_1], b2p_bpf_array, offsetof(struct bpf_array, map.max_entries)); ++ PPC_RLWINM(b2p_index, b2p_index, 0, 0, 31); + PPC_CMPLW(b2p_index, b2p[TMP_REG_1]); + PPC_BCC(COND_GE, out); + diff --git a/queue-4.9/bpf-x64-implement-retpoline-for-tail-call.patch b/queue-4.9/bpf-x64-implement-retpoline-for-tail-call.patch new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..a43dd4d31fb --- /dev/null +++ b/queue-4.9/bpf-x64-implement-retpoline-for-tail-call.patch @@ -0,0 +1,181 @@ +From foo@baz Fri Mar 9 14:20:51 PST 2018 +From: Daniel Borkmann +Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:17:34 +0100 +Subject: bpf, x64: implement retpoline for tail call +To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org +Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, stable@vger.kernel.org +Message-ID: + +From: Daniel Borkmann + +[ upstream commit a493a87f38cfa48caaa95c9347be2d914c6fdf29 ] + +Implement a retpoline [0] for the BPF tail call JIT'ing that converts +the indirect jump via jmp %rax that is used to make the long jump into +another JITed BPF image. Since this is subject to speculative execution, +we need to control the transient instruction sequence here as well +when CONFIG_RETPOLINE is set, and direct it into a pause + lfence loop. +The latter aligns also with what gcc / clang emits (e.g. [1]). + +JIT dump after patch: + + # bpftool p d x i 1 + 0: (18) r2 = map[id:1] + 2: (b7) r3 = 0 + 3: (85) call bpf_tail_call#12 + 4: (b7) r0 = 2 + 5: (95) exit + +With CONFIG_RETPOLINE: + + # bpftool p d j i 1 + [...] + 33: cmp %edx,0x24(%rsi) + 36: jbe 0x0000000000000072 |* + 38: mov 0x24(%rbp),%eax + 3e: cmp $0x20,%eax + 41: ja 0x0000000000000072 | + 43: add $0x1,%eax + 46: mov %eax,0x24(%rbp) + 4c: mov 0x90(%rsi,%rdx,8),%rax + 54: test %rax,%rax + 57: je 0x0000000000000072 | + 59: mov 0x28(%rax),%rax + 5d: add $0x25,%rax + 61: callq 0x000000000000006d |+ + 66: pause | + 68: lfence | + 6b: jmp 0x0000000000000066 | + 6d: mov %rax,(%rsp) | + 71: retq | + 72: mov $0x2,%eax + [...] + + * relative fall-through jumps in error case + + retpoline for indirect jump + +Without CONFIG_RETPOLINE: + + # bpftool p d j i 1 + [...] + 33: cmp %edx,0x24(%rsi) + 36: jbe 0x0000000000000063 |* + 38: mov 0x24(%rbp),%eax + 3e: cmp $0x20,%eax + 41: ja 0x0000000000000063 | + 43: add $0x1,%eax + 46: mov %eax,0x24(%rbp) + 4c: mov 0x90(%rsi,%rdx,8),%rax + 54: test %rax,%rax + 57: je 0x0000000000000063 | + 59: mov 0x28(%rax),%rax + 5d: add $0x25,%rax + 61: jmpq *%rax |- + 63: mov $0x2,%eax + [...] + + * relative fall-through jumps in error case + - plain indirect jump as before + + [0] https://support.google.com/faqs/answer/7625886 + [1] https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/a31e654fa107be968b802786d747e962c2fcdb2b + +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov +Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann +Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman +--- + arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 9 ++++---- + 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) + +--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h ++++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h +@@ -177,4 +177,41 @@ static inline void indirect_branch_predi + } + + #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */ ++ ++/* ++ * Below is used in the eBPF JIT compiler and emits the byte sequence ++ * for the following assembly: ++ * ++ * With retpolines configured: ++ * ++ * callq do_rop ++ * spec_trap: ++ * pause ++ * lfence ++ * jmp spec_trap ++ * do_rop: ++ * mov %rax,(%rsp) ++ * retq ++ * ++ * Without retpolines configured: ++ * ++ * jmp *%rax ++ */ ++#ifdef CONFIG_RETPOLINE ++# define RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT_SIZE 17 ++# define RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT() \ ++ EMIT1_off32(0xE8, 7); /* callq do_rop */ \ ++ /* spec_trap: */ \ ++ EMIT2(0xF3, 0x90); /* pause */ \ ++ EMIT3(0x0F, 0xAE, 0xE8); /* lfence */ \ ++ EMIT2(0xEB, 0xF9); /* jmp spec_trap */ \ ++ /* do_rop: */ \ ++ EMIT4(0x48, 0x89, 0x04, 0x24); /* mov %rax,(%rsp) */ \ ++ EMIT1(0xC3); /* retq */ ++#else ++# define RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT_SIZE 2 ++# define RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT() \ ++ EMIT2(0xFF, 0xE0); /* jmp *%rax */ ++#endif ++ + #endif /* _ASM_X86_NOSPEC_BRANCH_H_ */ +--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c ++++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c +@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ + #include + #include + #include ++#include + #include + + int bpf_jit_enable __read_mostly; +@@ -281,7 +282,7 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call(u8 **ppro + EMIT2(0x89, 0xD2); /* mov edx, edx */ + EMIT3(0x39, 0x56, /* cmp dword ptr [rsi + 16], edx */ + offsetof(struct bpf_array, map.max_entries)); +-#define OFFSET1 43 /* number of bytes to jump */ ++#define OFFSET1 (41 + RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT_SIZE) /* number of bytes to jump */ + EMIT2(X86_JBE, OFFSET1); /* jbe out */ + label1 = cnt; + +@@ -290,7 +291,7 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call(u8 **ppro + */ + EMIT2_off32(0x8B, 0x85, -STACKSIZE + 36); /* mov eax, dword ptr [rbp - 516] */ + EMIT3(0x83, 0xF8, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT); /* cmp eax, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT */ +-#define OFFSET2 32 ++#define OFFSET2 (30 + RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT_SIZE) + EMIT2(X86_JA, OFFSET2); /* ja out */ + label2 = cnt; + EMIT3(0x83, 0xC0, 0x01); /* add eax, 1 */ +@@ -304,7 +305,7 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call(u8 **ppro + * goto out; + */ + EMIT3(0x48, 0x85, 0xC0); /* test rax,rax */ +-#define OFFSET3 10 ++#define OFFSET3 (8 + RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT_SIZE) + EMIT2(X86_JE, OFFSET3); /* je out */ + label3 = cnt; + +@@ -317,7 +318,7 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call(u8 **ppro + * rdi == ctx (1st arg) + * rax == prog->bpf_func + prologue_size + */ +- EMIT2(0xFF, 0xE0); /* jmp rax */ ++ RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT(); + + /* out: */ + BUILD_BUG_ON(cnt - label1 != OFFSET1); diff --git a/queue-4.9/series b/queue-4.9/series index 10988ec6223..60ab5c6bc1a 100644 --- a/queue-4.9/series +++ b/queue-4.9/series @@ -56,3 +56,9 @@ s390-qeth-fix-ipa-command-submission-race.patch sctp-verify-size-of-a-new-chunk-in-_sctp_make_chunk.patch net-mpls-pull-common-label-check-into-helper.patch mpls-nospec-sanitize-array-index-in-mpls_label_ok.patch +bpf-fix-wrong-exposure-of-map_flags-into-fdinfo-for-lpm.patch +bpf-fix-mlock-precharge-on-arraymaps.patch +bpf-x64-implement-retpoline-for-tail-call.patch +bpf-arm64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch +bpf-add-schedule-points-in-percpu-arrays-management.patch +bpf-ppc64-fix-out-of-bounds-access-in-tail-call.patch