Commit 443574b0 authored by Pu Lehui's avatar Pu Lehui Committed by Alexei Starovoitov

riscv, bpf: Fix kfunc parameters incompatibility between bpf and riscv abi

We encountered a failing case when running selftest in no_alu32 mode:

The failure case is `kfunc_call/kfunc_call_test4` and its source code is
like bellow:
```
long bpf_kfunc_call_test4(signed char a, short b, int c, long d) __ksym;
int kfunc_call_test4(struct __sk_buff *skb)
{
	...
	tmp = bpf_kfunc_call_test4(-3, -30, -200, -1000);
	...
}
```

And its corresponding asm code is:
```
0: r1 = -3
1: r2 = -30
2: r3 = 0xffffff38 # opcode: 18 03 00 00 38 ff ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
4: r4 = -1000
5: call bpf_kfunc_call_test4
```

insn 2 is parsed to ld_imm64 insn to emit 0x00000000ffffff38 imm, and
converted to int type and then send to bpf_kfunc_call_test4. But since
it is zero-extended in the bpf calling convention, riscv jit will
directly treat it as an unsigned 32-bit int value, and then fails with
the message "actual 4294966063 != expected -1234".

The reason is the incompatibility between bpf and riscv abi, that is,
bpf will do zero-extension on uint, but riscv64 requires sign-extension
on int or uint. We can solve this problem by sign extending the 32-bit
parameters in kfunc.

The issue is related to [0], and thanks to Yonghong and Alexei.

Link: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84874 [0]
Fixes: d40c3847 ("riscv, bpf: Add kfunc support for RV64")
Signed-off-by: default avatarPu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
Tested-by: default avatarPuranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarPuranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240324103306.2202954-1-pulehui@huaweicloud.comSigned-off-by: default avatarAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
parent 122fdbd2
......@@ -1463,6 +1463,22 @@ int bpf_jit_emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx,
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
if (insn->src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL) {
const struct btf_func_model *fm;
int idx;
fm = bpf_jit_find_kfunc_model(ctx->prog, insn);
if (!fm)
return -EINVAL;
for (idx = 0; idx < fm->nr_args; idx++) {
u8 reg = bpf_to_rv_reg(BPF_REG_1 + idx, ctx);
if (fm->arg_size[idx] == sizeof(int))
emit_sextw(reg, reg, ctx);
}
}
ret = emit_call(addr, fixed_addr, ctx);
if (ret)
return ret;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment