diff mbox series

[v5,bpf-next,11/23] bpf: rename is_branch_taken reg arguments to prepare for the second one

Message ID 20231027181346.4019398-12-andrii@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / test (test_progs_no_alu32_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / test (test_progs_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / veristat
netdev/series_format fail Series longer than 15 patches (and no cover letter)
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next, async
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit fail Errors and warnings before: 1374 this patch: 16
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 8 maintainers not CCed: john.fastabend@gmail.com kpsingh@kernel.org song@kernel.org sdf@google.com jolsa@kernel.org martin.lau@linux.dev yonghong.song@linux.dev haoluo@google.com
netdev/build_clang fail Errors and warnings before: 15 this patch: 15
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/deprecated_api success None detected
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn fail Errors and warnings before: 1399 this patch: 16
netdev/checkpatch warning WARNING: line length of 82 exceeds 80 columns
netdev/build_clang_rust success Link
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-0 success Logs for Lint
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for Validate matrix.py
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build / build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build / build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for s390x-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build / build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / veristat / veristat on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-16 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on s390x with gcc

Commit Message

Andrii Nakryiko Oct. 27, 2023, 6:13 p.m. UTC 
Just taking mundane refactoring bits out into a separate patch. No
functional changes.

Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)

Comments

Alexei Starovoitov Oct. 30, 2023, 7:39 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:13:34AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Just taking mundane refactoring bits out into a separate patch. No
> functional changes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> ---
>  kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index f5fcb7fb2c67..aa13f32751a1 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -14169,26 +14169,25 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
>  	}));
>  }
>  
> -static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
> +static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u32 val, u8 opcode)
>  {
> -	struct tnum subreg = tnum_subreg(reg->var_off);

Looks like accidental removal that breaks build.

>  	s32 sval = (s32)val;
>  
>  	switch (opcode) {
>  	case BPF_JEQ:
>  		if (tnum_is_const(subreg))
>  			return !!tnum_equals_const(subreg, val);
Andrii Nakryiko Oct. 31, 2023, 5:19 a.m. UTC | #2 
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:40 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:13:34AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > Just taking mundane refactoring bits out into a separate patch. No
> > functional changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> >  1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index f5fcb7fb2c67..aa13f32751a1 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -14169,26 +14169,25 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
> >       }));
> >  }
> >
> > -static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
> > +static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u32 val, u8 opcode)
> >  {
> > -     struct tnum subreg = tnum_subreg(reg->var_off);
>
> Looks like accidental removal that breaks build.
>

Yeah, sorry, there was *a lot* of rebasing involved to split all this
up. I'll fix it, thanks for spotting!

> >       s32 sval = (s32)val;
> >
> >       switch (opcode) {
> >       case BPF_JEQ:
> >               if (tnum_is_const(subreg))
> >                       return !!tnum_equals_const(subreg, val);
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index f5fcb7fb2c67..aa13f32751a1 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -14169,26 +14169,25 @@  static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
 	}));
 }
 
-static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
+static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u32 val, u8 opcode)
 {
-	struct tnum subreg = tnum_subreg(reg->var_off);
 	s32 sval = (s32)val;
 
 	switch (opcode) {
 	case BPF_JEQ:
 		if (tnum_is_const(subreg))
 			return !!tnum_equals_const(subreg, val);
-		else if (val < reg->u32_min_value || val > reg->u32_max_value)
+		else if (val < reg1->u32_min_value || val > reg1->u32_max_value)
 			return 0;
-		else if (sval < reg->s32_min_value || sval > reg->s32_max_value)
+		else if (sval < reg1->s32_min_value || sval > reg1->s32_max_value)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JNE:
 		if (tnum_is_const(subreg))
 			return !tnum_equals_const(subreg, val);
-		else if (val < reg->u32_min_value || val > reg->u32_max_value)
+		else if (val < reg1->u32_min_value || val > reg1->u32_max_value)
 			return 1;
-		else if (sval < reg->s32_min_value || sval > reg->s32_max_value)
+		else if (sval < reg1->s32_min_value || sval > reg1->s32_max_value)
 			return 1;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSET:
@@ -14198,51 +14197,51 @@  static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JGT:
-		if (reg->u32_min_value > val)
+		if (reg1->u32_min_value > val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->u32_max_value <= val)
+		else if (reg1->u32_max_value <= val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSGT:
-		if (reg->s32_min_value > sval)
+		if (reg1->s32_min_value > sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->s32_max_value <= sval)
+		else if (reg1->s32_max_value <= sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JLT:
-		if (reg->u32_max_value < val)
+		if (reg1->u32_max_value < val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->u32_min_value >= val)
+		else if (reg1->u32_min_value >= val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSLT:
-		if (reg->s32_max_value < sval)
+		if (reg1->s32_max_value < sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->s32_min_value >= sval)
+		else if (reg1->s32_min_value >= sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JGE:
-		if (reg->u32_min_value >= val)
+		if (reg1->u32_min_value >= val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->u32_max_value < val)
+		else if (reg1->u32_max_value < val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSGE:
-		if (reg->s32_min_value >= sval)
+		if (reg1->s32_min_value >= sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->s32_max_value < sval)
+		else if (reg1->s32_max_value < sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JLE:
-		if (reg->u32_max_value <= val)
+		if (reg1->u32_max_value <= val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->u32_min_value > val)
+		else if (reg1->u32_min_value > val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSLE:
-		if (reg->s32_max_value <= sval)
+		if (reg1->s32_max_value <= sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->s32_min_value > sval)
+		else if (reg1->s32_min_value > sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	}
@@ -14251,79 +14250,79 @@  static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
 }
 
 
-static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode)
+static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode)
 {
 	s64 sval = (s64)val;
 
 	switch (opcode) {
 	case BPF_JEQ:
-		if (tnum_is_const(reg->var_off))
-			return !!tnum_equals_const(reg->var_off, val);
-		else if (val < reg->umin_value || val > reg->umax_value)
+		if (tnum_is_const(reg1->var_off))
+			return !!tnum_equals_const(reg1->var_off, val);
+		else if (val < reg1->umin_value || val > reg1->umax_value)
 			return 0;
-		else if (sval < reg->smin_value || sval > reg->smax_value)
+		else if (sval < reg1->smin_value || sval > reg1->smax_value)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JNE:
-		if (tnum_is_const(reg->var_off))
-			return !tnum_equals_const(reg->var_off, val);
-		else if (val < reg->umin_value || val > reg->umax_value)
+		if (tnum_is_const(reg1->var_off))
+			return !tnum_equals_const(reg1->var_off, val);
+		else if (val < reg1->umin_value || val > reg1->umax_value)
 			return 1;
-		else if (sval < reg->smin_value || sval > reg->smax_value)
+		else if (sval < reg1->smin_value || sval > reg1->smax_value)
 			return 1;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSET:
-		if ((~reg->var_off.mask & reg->var_off.value) & val)
+		if ((~reg1->var_off.mask & reg1->var_off.value) & val)
 			return 1;
-		if (!((reg->var_off.mask | reg->var_off.value) & val))
+		if (!((reg1->var_off.mask | reg1->var_off.value) & val))
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JGT:
-		if (reg->umin_value > val)
+		if (reg1->umin_value > val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->umax_value <= val)
+		else if (reg1->umax_value <= val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSGT:
-		if (reg->smin_value > sval)
+		if (reg1->smin_value > sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->smax_value <= sval)
+		else if (reg1->smax_value <= sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JLT:
-		if (reg->umax_value < val)
+		if (reg1->umax_value < val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->umin_value >= val)
+		else if (reg1->umin_value >= val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSLT:
-		if (reg->smax_value < sval)
+		if (reg1->smax_value < sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->smin_value >= sval)
+		else if (reg1->smin_value >= sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JGE:
-		if (reg->umin_value >= val)
+		if (reg1->umin_value >= val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->umax_value < val)
+		else if (reg1->umax_value < val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSGE:
-		if (reg->smin_value >= sval)
+		if (reg1->smin_value >= sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->smax_value < sval)
+		else if (reg1->smax_value < sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JLE:
-		if (reg->umax_value <= val)
+		if (reg1->umax_value <= val)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->umin_value > val)
+		else if (reg1->umin_value > val)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	case BPF_JSLE:
-		if (reg->smax_value <= sval)
+		if (reg1->smax_value <= sval)
 			return 1;
-		else if (reg->smin_value > sval)
+		else if (reg1->smin_value > sval)
 			return 0;
 		break;
 	}
@@ -14338,11 +14337,11 @@  static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode)
  * -1 - unknown. Example: "if (reg < 5)" is unknown when register value
  *      range [0,10]
  */
-static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode,
+static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode,
 			   bool is_jmp32)
 {
-	if (__is_pointer_value(false, reg)) {
-		if (!reg_not_null(reg))
+	if (__is_pointer_value(false, reg1)) {
+		if (!reg_not_null(reg1))
 			return -1;
 
 		/* If pointer is valid tests against zero will fail so we can
@@ -14362,8 +14361,8 @@  static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u64 val, u8 opcode,
 	}
 
 	if (is_jmp32)
-		return is_branch32_taken(reg, val, opcode);
-	return is_branch64_taken(reg, val, opcode);
+		return is_branch32_taken(reg1, val, opcode);
+	return is_branch64_taken(reg1, val, opcode);
 }
 
 static int flip_opcode(u32 opcode)