@@ -708,7 +708,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_arsh_r64(con
}
/* dst = dst >> src */
-static inline void emit_a32_lsr_r64(const u8 dst[], const u8 src[], bool dstk,
+static inline void emit_a32_rsh_r64(const u8 dst[], const u8 src[], bool dstk,
bool sstk, struct jit_ctx *ctx) {
const u8 *tmp = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_1];
const u8 *tmp2 = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_2];
@@ -724,7 +724,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_lsr_r64(cons
emit(ARM_LDR_I(rm, ARM_SP, STACK_VAR(dst_hi)), ctx);
}
- /* Do LSH operation */
+ /* Do RSH operation */
emit(ARM_RSB_I(ARM_IP, rt, 32), ctx);
emit(ARM_SUBS_I(tmp2[0], rt, 32), ctx);
emit(ARM_MOV_SR(ARM_LR, rd, SRTYPE_LSR, rt), ctx);
@@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_lsh_i64(cons
}
/* dst = dst >> val */
-static inline void emit_a32_lsr_i64(const u8 dst[], bool dstk,
+static inline void emit_a32_rsh_i64(const u8 dst[], bool dstk,
const u32 val, struct jit_ctx *ctx) {
const u8 *tmp = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_1];
const u8 *tmp2 = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_2];
@@ -1330,7 +1330,7 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_i
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_K:
if (unlikely(imm > 63))
return -EINVAL;
- emit_a32_lsr_i64(dst, dstk, imm, ctx);
+ emit_a32_rsh_i64(dst, dstk, imm, ctx);
break;
/* dst = dst << src */
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_X:
@@ -1338,7 +1338,7 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_i
break;
/* dst = dst >> src */
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_X:
- emit_a32_lsr_r64(dst, src, dstk, sstk, ctx);
+ emit_a32_rsh_r64(dst, src, dstk, sstk, ctx);
break;
/* dst = dst >> src (signed) */
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X:
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled bpf, arm32: fix inconsistent naming about emit_a32_lsr_{r64,i64} to the 4.17-stable tree which can be found at: http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary The filename of the patch is: bpf-arm32-fix-inconsistent-naming-about-emit_a32_lsr_-r64-i64.patch and it can be found in the queue-4.17 subdirectory. If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it. From foo@baz Sat Jul 28 10:14:30 CEST 2018 From: Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 10:52:17 +0800 Subject: bpf, arm32: fix inconsistent naming about emit_a32_lsr_{r64,i64} From: Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 68565a1af9f7012e6f2fe2bdd612f67d2d830c28 ] The names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH are emit_a32_arsh_*, the names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH are emit_a32_lsh_*, but the names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH are emit_a32_lsr_*. For consistence reason, let's rename emit_a32_lsr_* to emit_a32_rsh_*. This patch also corrects a wrong comment. Fixes: 39c13c204bb1 ("arm: eBPF JIT compiler") Signed-off-by: Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com> Cc: Shubham Bansal <illusionist.neo@gmail.com> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux@armlinux.org.uk Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> --- arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from udknight@gmail.com are queue-4.17/bpf-arm32-fix-inconsistent-naming-about-emit_a32_lsr_-r64-i64.patch