netfilter: ebtables: Fix argument order to ADD_COUNTER

[ Upstream commit f20faa06 ]

The ordering of arguments to the x_tables ADD_COUNTER macro
appears to be wrong in ebtables (cf. ip_tables.c, ip6_tables.c,
and arp_tables.c).

This causes data corruption in the ebtables userspace tools
because they get incorrect packet & byte counts from the kernel.

Fixes: d72133e6 ("netfilter: ebtables: use ADD_COUNTER macro")
Signed-off-by: Todd Seidelmann <tseidelmann@linode.com>
Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c

@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ unsigned int ebt_do_table(struct sk_buff *skb,
 			return NF_DROP;
 		}
 
-		ADD_COUNTER(*(counter_base + i), 1, skb->len);
+		ADD_COUNTER(*(counter_base + i), skb->len, 1);
 
 		/* these should only watch: not modify, nor tell us
 		 * what to do with the packet
@@ -963,8 +963,8 @@ static void get_counters(const struct ebt_counter *oldcounters,
 			continue;
 		counter_base = COUNTER_BASE(oldcounters, nentries, cpu);
 		for (i = 0; i < nentries; i++)
-			ADD_COUNTER(counters[i], counter_base[i].pcnt,
-				    counter_base[i].bcnt);
+			ADD_COUNTER(counters[i], counter_base[i].bcnt,
+				    counter_base[i].pcnt);
 	}
 }
 
@@ -1289,7 +1289,7 @@ static int do_update_counters(struct net *net, const char *name,
 
 	/* we add to the counters of the first cpu */
 	for (i = 0; i < num_counters; i++)
-		ADD_COUNTER(t->private->counters[i], tmp[i].pcnt, tmp[i].bcnt);
+		ADD_COUNTER(t->private->counters[i], tmp[i].bcnt, tmp[i].pcnt);
 
 	write_unlock_bh(&t->lock);
 	ret = 0;