From patchwork Mon May 30 09:28:10 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Pu Lehui X-Patchwork-Id: 12864473 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61939C433F5 for ; Mon, 30 May 2022 08:58:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234519AbiE3I6g (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2022 04:58:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52966 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234476AbiE3I6e (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2022 04:58:34 -0400 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88B9E7220E; Mon, 30 May 2022 01:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dggpemm500022.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.53]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4LBTl26c7JzQkPB; Mon, 30 May 2022 16:55:26 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemm500019.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.180) by dggpemm500022.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.162) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Mon, 30 May 2022 16:58:31 +0800 Received: from k04.huawei.com (10.67.174.115) by dggpemm500019.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.180) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Mon, 30 May 2022 16:58:31 +0800 From: Pu Lehui To: , , , CC: Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , =?utf-8?b?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= , Luke Nelson , Xi Wang , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Pu Lehui Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/6] bpf: Unify data extension operation of jited_ksyms and jited_linfo Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 17:28:10 +0800 Message-ID: <20220530092815.1112406-2-pulehui@huawei.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 In-Reply-To: <20220530092815.1112406-1-pulehui@huawei.com> References: <20220530092815.1112406-1-pulehui@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [10.67.174.115] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To dggpemm500019.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.180) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net We found that 32-bit environment can not print bpf line info due to data inconsistency between jited_ksyms[0] and jited_linfo[0]. For example: jited_kyms[0] = 0xb800067c, jited_linfo[0] = 0xffffffffb800067c We know that both of them store bpf func address, but due to the different data extension operations when extended to u64, they may not be the same. We need to unify the data extension operations of them. Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui --- kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c index e0aead17dff4..2929a4aab82c 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c @@ -4095,14 +4095,15 @@ static int bpf_prog_get_info_by_fd(struct file *file, info.nr_jited_line_info = 0; if (info.nr_jited_line_info && ulen) { if (bpf_dump_raw_ok(file->f_cred)) { + unsigned long ladd; __u64 __user *user_linfo; u32 i; user_linfo = u64_to_user_ptr(info.jited_line_info); ulen = min_t(u32, info.nr_jited_line_info, ulen); for (i = 0; i < ulen; i++) { - if (put_user((__u64)(long)prog->aux->jited_linfo[i], - &user_linfo[i])) + ladd = (unsigned long)prog->aux->jited_linfo[i]; + if (put_user((__u64)ladd, &user_linfo[i])) return -EFAULT; } } else {