bpf, arm32: correct check_imm24

imm24 is signed, so the right range is:

  [-(1<<(24 - 1)), (1<<(24 - 1)) - 1]

Note: this patch also fix a typo.

Fixes: 39c13c204b ("arm: eBPF JIT compiler")
Signed-off-by: Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com>
Cc: Shubham Bansal <illusionist.neo@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux@armlinux.org.uk
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
This commit is contained in:
Wang YanQing 2018-05-11 11:06:34 +08:00 committed by Daniel Borkmann
parent 34ea38ca27
commit 2b589a7e2b

View File

@ -84,7 +84,7 @@
*
* 1. First argument is passed using the arm 32bit registers and rest of the
* arguments are passed on stack scratch space.
* 2. First callee-saved arugument is mapped to arm 32 bit registers and rest
* 2. First callee-saved argument is mapped to arm 32 bit registers and rest
* arguments are mapped to scratch space on stack.
* 3. We need two 64 bit temp registers to do complex operations on eBPF
* registers.
@ -1192,8 +1192,8 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
s32 jmp_offset;
#define check_imm(bits, imm) do { \
if ((((imm) > 0) && ((imm) >> (bits))) || \
(((imm) < 0) && (~(imm) >> (bits)))) { \
if ((imm) >= (1 << ((bits) - 1)) || \
(imm) < -(1 << ((bits) - 1))) { \
pr_info("[%2d] imm=%d(0x%x) out of range\n", \
i, imm, imm); \
return -EINVAL; \