Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[PATCH] btrfs: fix transaction handle leak after verity rollback #315

Closed
fdmanana opened this issue Sep 8, 2021 · 0 comments
Closed

[PATCH] btrfs: fix transaction handle leak after verity rollback #315

fdmanana opened this issue Sep 8, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@fdmanana
Copy link

fdmanana commented Sep 8, 2021

Link to patches

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/b390e518f2091df52fd314806cce52fd00a19a00.1631114872.git.fdmanana@suse.com/

b4 am b390e518f2091df52fd314806cce52fd00a19a00.1631114872.git.fdmanana@suse.com
@kdave kdave added the misc-next patches are in misc-next label Sep 9, 2021
@kdave kdave removed the misc-next patches are in misc-next label Nov 2, 2021
@kdave kdave closed this as completed Nov 2, 2021
kdave pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 2, 2024
@sm00th
arm64: bpf: fix 32bit unconditional bswap
a51cd6b 
In case when is64 == 1 in emit(A64_REV32(is64, dst, dst), ctx) the
generated insn reverses byte order for both high and low 32-bit words,
resuling in an incorrect swap as indicated by the jit test:

[ 9757.262607] test_bpf: #312 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.264435] test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 ret 1460850314 != -271733879 (0x5712ce8a != 0xefcdab89)FAIL (1 times)
[ 9757.266260] test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.268000] test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.269686] test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.271380] test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 ret -1460850316 != 271733878 (0xa8ed3174 != 0x10325476)FAIL (1 times)
[ 9757.273022] test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe jited:1 7 PASS
[ 9757.274721] test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 9 PASS

Fix this by forcing 32bit variant of rev32.

Fixes: 1104247 ("bpf, arm64: Support unconditional bswap")
Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Puranjay Mohan <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Puranjay Mohan <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Xu Kuohai <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
kdave pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 17, 2024
@chleroy @mpe
powerpc/bpf/32: Fix failing test_bpf tests
8ecf3c1 
Recent additions in BPF like cpu v4 instructions, test_bpf module
exhibits the following failures:

  test_bpf: #82 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #83 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #84 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #85 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #86 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_W jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #165 ALU_SDIV_X: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #166 ALU_SDIV_K: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #169 ALU_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #170 ALU_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #172 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 301 PASS
  test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 555 PASS
  test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 268 PASS
  test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 269 PASS
  test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 460 PASS
  test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 320 PASS
  test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 222 PASS
  test_bpf: #320 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 273 PASS

  test_bpf: #344 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_B
  eBPF filter opcode 0091 (@5) unsupported
  jited:0 432 PASS
  test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_H
  eBPF filter opcode 0089 (@5) unsupported
  jited:0 381 PASS
  test_bpf: #346 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
  eBPF filter opcode 0081 (@5) unsupported
  jited:0 505 PASS

  test_bpf: #490 JMP32_JA: Unconditional jump: if (true) return 1
  eBPF filter opcode 0006 (@1) unsupported
  jited:0 261 PASS

  test_bpf: Summary: 1040 PASSED, 10 FAILED, [924/1038 JIT'ed]

Fix them by adding missing processing.

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[email protected]>
Link: https://msgid.link/91de862dda99d170697eb79ffb478678af7e0b27.1709652689.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@fdmanana @kdave