This patch adds recently added constant blinding helpers into the
arm64 eBPF JIT. In the bpf_int_jit_compile() path, requirements are
to utilize bpf_jit_blind_constants()/bpf_jit_prog_release_other()
pair for rewriting the program into a blinded one, and to map the
BPF_REG_AX register to a CPU register. The mapping is on x9.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Tested-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

Since the blinding is strictly only called from inside eBPF JITs,
we need to change signatures for bpf_int_jit_compile() and
bpf_prog_select_runtime() first in order to prepare that the
eBPF program we're dealing with can change underneath. Hence,
for call sites, we need to return the latest prog. No functional
change in this patch.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

There is never such a situation, where bpf_int_jit_compile() is
called with either prog as NULL or len as 0, so the tests are
unnecessary and confusing as people would just copy them. s390
doesn't have them, so no change is needed there.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

Original implementation commit e54bcde3 ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
had the relevant code paths, but due to an oversight always fail jiting.

As a result, we had been falling back to BPF interpreter whenever a BPF
program has JMP_JSET_{X,K} instructions.

With this fix, we confirm that the corresponding tests in lib/test_bpf
continue to pass, and also jited.

...
[    2.784553] test_bpf: #30 JSET jited:1 188 192 197 PASS
[    2.791373] test_bpf: #31 tcpdump port 22 jited:1 325 677 625 PASS
[    2.808800] test_bpf: #32 tcpdump complex jited:1 323 731 991 PASS
...
[    3.190759] test_bpf: #237 JMP_JSET_K: if (0x3 & 0x2) return 1 jited:1 110 PASS
[    3.192524] test_bpf: #238 JMP_JSET_K: if (0x3 & 0xffffffff) return 1 jited:1 98 PASS
[    3.211014] test_bpf: #249 JMP_JSET_X: if (0x3 & 0x2) return 1 jited:1 120 PASS
[    3.212973] test_bpf: #250 JMP_JSET_X: if (0x3 & 0xffffffff) return 1 jited:1 89 PASS
...

Fixes: e54bcde3 ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Acked-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

Code generation functions in arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c previously
BUG_ON invalid parameters. Following change of that behavior, now we
need to handle the error case where AARCH64_BREAK_FAULT is returned.

Instead of error-handling on every emit() in JIT, we add a new
validation pass at the end of JIT compilation. There's no point in
running JITed code at run-time only to trap due to AARCH64_BREAK_FAULT.
Instead, we drop this failed JIT compilation and allow the system to
gracefully fallback on the BPF interpreter.
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

Back in the days where eBPF (or back then "internal BPF" ;->) was not
exposed to user space, and only the classic BPF programs internally
translated into eBPF programs, we missed the fact that for classic BPF
A and X needed to be cleared. It was fixed back then via 83d5b7ef
("net: filter: initialize A and X registers"), and thus classic BPF
specifics were added to the eBPF interpreter core to work around it.

This added some confusion for JIT developers later on that take the
eBPF interpreter code as an example for deriving their JIT. F.e. in
f75298f5 ("s390/bpf: clear correct BPF accumulator register"), at
least X could leak stack memory. Furthermore, since this is only needed
for classic BPF translations and not for eBPF (verifier takes care
that read access to regs cannot be done uninitialized), more complexity
is added to JITs as they need to determine whether they deal with
migrations or native eBPF where they can just omit clearing A/X in
their prologue and thus reduce image size a bit, see f.e. cde66c2d
("s390/bpf: Only clear A and X for converted BPF programs"). In other
cases (x86, arm64), A and X is being cleared in the prologue also for
eBPF case, which is unnecessary.

Lets move this into the BPF migration in bpf_convert_filter() where it
actually belongs as long as the number of eBPF JITs are still few. It
can thus be done generically; allowing us to remove the quirk from
__bpf_prog_run() and to slightly reduce JIT image size in case of eBPF,
while reducing code duplication on this matter in current(/future) eBPF
JITs.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: NMichael Holzheu <holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: NMichael Holzheu <holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Acked-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Acked-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

aarch64 doesn't have native store immediate instruction, such operation
has to be implemented by the below instruction sequence:

Load immediate to register
Store register
Signed-off-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
CC: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
CC: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

During code review, I noticed we were passing a bad buffer pointer
to bpf_load_pointer helper function called by jitted code.

Point to the buffer allocated by JIT, so we don't silently corrupt
other parts of the stack.
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

Save and restore FP/LR in BPF prog prologue and epilogue, save SP to FP
in prologue in order to get the correct stack backtrace.

However, ARM64 JIT used FP (x29) as eBPF fp register, FP is subjected to
change during function call so it may cause the BPF prog stack base address
change too.

Use x25 to replace FP as BPF stack base register (fp). Since x25 is callee
saved register, so it will keep intact during function call.
It is initialized in BPF prog prologue when BPF prog is started to run
everytime. Save and restore x25/x26 in BPF prologue and epilogue to keep
them intact for the outside of BPF. Actually, x26 is unnecessary, but SP
requires 16 bytes alignment.

So, the BPF stack layout looks like:

                                 high
         original A64_SP =>   0:+-----+ BPF prologue
                                |FP/LR|
         current A64_FP =>  -16:+-----+
                                | ... | callee saved registers
                                +-----+
                                |     | x25/x26
         BPF fp register => -80:+-----+
                                |     |
                                | ... | BPF prog stack
                                |     |
                                |     |
         current A64_SP =>      +-----+
                                |     |
                                | ... | Function call stack
                                |     |
                                +-----+
                                  low

CC: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
CC: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Acked-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

While recently going over ARM64's BPF code, I noticed that the icache
range we're flushing should start at header already and not at ctx.image.

Reason is that after b569c1c6 ("net: bpf: arm64: address randomize
and write protect JIT code"), we also want to make sure to flush the
random-sized trap in front of the start of the actual program (analogous
to x86). No operational differences from user side.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

BPF fp should point to the top of the BPF prog stack. The original
implementation made it point to the bottom incorrectly.
Move A64_SP to fp before reserve BPF prog stack space.

CC: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
CC: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

Turns out in the case of modulo by zero in a BPF program:
	A = A % X;  (X == 0)
the expected behavior is to terminate with return value 0.

The bug in JIT is exposed by a new test case [1].

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/4/499Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Reported-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Reported-by: NXi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
CC: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Fixes: e54bcde3 ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.18+
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

In the case of division by zero in a BPF program:
	A = A / X;  (X == 0)
the expected behavior is to terminate with return value 0.

This is confirmed by the test case introduced in commit 86bf1721
("test_bpf: add tests checking that JIT/interpreter sets A and X to 0.").
Reported-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
Tested-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>
CC: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
CC: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
CC: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: e54bcde3 ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.18+
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

As we need to add further flags to the bpf_prog structure, lets migrate
both bools to a bitfield representation. The size of the base structure
(excluding insns) remains unchanged at 40 bytes.

Add also tags for the kmemchecker, so that it doesn't throw false
positives. Even in case gcc would generate suboptimal code, it's not
being accessed in performance critical paths.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

Upper bits should be zeroed in endianness conversion:

- even when there's no need to change endianness (i.e., BPF_FROM_BE
  on big endian or BPF_FROM_LE on little endian);

- after rev16.

This patch fixes such bugs by emitting extra instructions to clear
upper bits.

Cc: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Fixes: e54bcde3 ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.18+
Signed-off-by: NXi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Problems occur when bpf_to or bpf_from has value prog->len - 1 (e.g.,
"Very long jump backwards" in test_bpf where the last instruction is a
jump): since ctx->offset has length prog->len, ctx->offset[bpf_to + 1]
or ctx->offset[bpf_from + 1] will cause an out-of-bounds read, leading
to a bogus jump offset and kernel panic.

This patch moves updating ctx->offset to after calling build_insn(),
and changes indexing to use bpf_to and bpf_from without + 1.

Fixes: e54bcde3 ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.18+
Cc: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: NXi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Consider "(u64)insn1.imm << 32 | imm" in the arm64 JIT.  Since imm is
signed 32-bit, it is sign-extended to 64-bit, losing the high 32 bits.
The fix is to convert imm to u32 first, which will be zero-extended to
u64 implicitly.

Cc: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Fixes: 30d3d94c ("arm64: bpf: add 'load 64-bit immediate' instruction")
Signed-off-by: NXi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
[will: removed non-arm64 bits and redundant casting]
Signed-off-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>

Earlier implementation assumed last instruction is BPF_EXIT.
Since this is no longer a restriction in eBPF, we remove this
limitation.

Per Alexei Starovoitov [1]:
> classic BPF has a restriction that last insn is always BPF_RET.
> eBPF doesn't have BPF_RET instruction and this restriction.
> It has BPF_EXIT insn which can appear anywhere in the program
> one or more times and it doesn't have to be last insn.

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/27/2

Fixes: e54bcde3 ("arm64: eBPF JIT compiler")
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>

Commit 286aad3c ("net: bpf: be friendly to kmemcheck") changed the
type of jited from a bitfield into a bool. As this commmit wasn't available
at the time when arm64 eBPF JIT was merged, fix it up now as net is merged
into mainline.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Cc: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Commit 02ab695b (net: filter: add "load 64-bit immediate" eBPF
instruction) introduced a new eBPF instruction. Let's add support
for this for arm64 as well.

Our arm64 eBPF JIT compiler now passes the new "load 64-bit
immediate" test case introduced in the same commit 02ab695b.
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Commit 72b603ee ("bpf: x86: add missing 'shift by register'
instructions to x64 eBPF JIT") noted support for 'shift by register'
in eBPF and added support for it for x64. Let's enable this for arm64
as well.

The arm64 eBPF JIT compiler now passes the new 'shift by register'
test case introduced in the same commit 72b603ee.
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

This is the ARM64 variant for 314beb9b ("x86: bpf_jit_comp: secure bpf
jit against spraying attacks").

Thanks to commit 11d91a77 ("arm64: Add CONFIG_DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX
support") which added necessary infrastructure, we can now implement
RO marking of eBPF generated JIT image pages and randomize start offset
for the JIT code, so that it does not reside directly on a page boundary
anymore. Likewise, the holes are filled with illegal instructions: here
we use BRK #0x100 (opcode 0xd4202000) to trigger a fault in the kernel
(unallocated BRKs would trigger a fault through do_debug_exception). This
seems more reliable as we don't have a guaranteed undefined instruction
space on ARM64.

This is basically the ARM64 variant of what we already have in ARM via
commit 55309dd3 ("net: bpf: arm: address randomize and write protect
JIT code"). Moreover, this commit also presents a merge resolution due to
conflicts with commit 60a3b225 ("net: bpf: make eBPF interpreter images
read-only") as we don't use kfree() in bpf_jit_free() anymore to release
the locked bpf_prog structure, but instead bpf_prog_unlock_free() through
a different allocator.

JIT tested on aarch64 with BPF test suite.

Reference: http://mainisusuallyafunction.blogspot.com/2012/11/attacking-hardened-linux-systems-with.htmlSigned-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

On ARM64, when the BPF JIT compiler fills the JIT image body with
opcodes during translation of eBPF into ARM64 opcodes, we may fail
for several reasons during that phase: one being that we jump to
the notyet label for not yet supported eBPF instructions such as
BPF_ST. In that case we only free offsets, but not the actual
allocated target image where opcodes are being stored. Fix it by
calling module_free() on dismantle time in case of errors.
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Acked-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Signed-off-by: NCatalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

The JIT compiler emits A64 instructions. It supports eBPF only.
Legacy BPF is supported thanks to conversion by BPF core.

JIT is enabled in the same way as for other architectures:

	echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable

Or for additional compiler output:

	echo 2 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable

See Documentation/networking/filter.txt for more information.

The implementation passes all 57 tests in lib/test_bpf.c
on ARMv8 Foundation Model :) Also tested by Will on Juno platform.
Signed-off-by: NZi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Acked-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>