4.14-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Wang YanQing <udkni...@gmail.com>
[ Upstream commit 68565a1af9f7012e6f2fe2bdd612f67d2d830c28 ]
The names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH are emit_a32_arsh_*,
the names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH are emit_a32_lsh_*, but
the names for BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH are emit_a32_lsr_*.
For consistence reason, let's rename emit_a32_lsr_* to
emit_a32_rsh_*.
This patch also corrects a wrong comment.
Fixes: 39c13c204bb1 ("arm: eBPF JIT compiler")
Signed-off-by: Wang YanQing <udkni...@gmail.com>
Cc: Shubham Bansal <illusionist....@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
Cc: li...@armlinux.org.uk
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.le...@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>
---
arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
+++ b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
@@ -718,7 +718,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_arsh_r64(con
}
/* dst = dst >> src */
-static inline void emit_a32_lsr_r64(const u8 dst[], const u8 src[], bool dstk,
+static inline void emit_a32_rsh_r64(const u8 dst[], const u8 src[], bool dstk,
bool sstk, struct jit_ctx *ctx) {
const u8 *tmp = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_1];
const u8 *tmp2 = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_2];
@@ -734,7 +734,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_lsr_r64(cons
emit(ARM_LDR_I(rm, ARM_SP, STACK_VAR(dst_hi)), ctx);
}
- /* Do LSH operation */
+ /* Do RSH operation */
emit(ARM_RSB_I(ARM_IP, rt, 32), ctx);
emit(ARM_SUBS_I(tmp2[0], rt, 32), ctx);
emit(ARM_MOV_SR(ARM_LR, rd, SRTYPE_LSR, rt), ctx);
@@ -784,7 +784,7 @@ static inline void emit_a32_lsh_i64(cons
}
/* dst = dst >> val */
-static inline void emit_a32_lsr_i64(const u8 dst[], bool dstk,
+static inline void emit_a32_rsh_i64(const u8 dst[], bool dstk,
const u32 val, struct jit_ctx *ctx) {
const u8 *tmp = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_1];
const u8 *tmp2 = bpf2a32[TMP_REG_2];
@@ -1340,7 +1340,7 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_i
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_K:
if (unlikely(imm > 63))
return -EINVAL;
- emit_a32_lsr_i64(dst, dstk, imm, ctx);
+ emit_a32_rsh_i64(dst, dstk, imm, ctx);
break;
/* dst = dst << src */
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_X:
@@ -1348,7 +1348,7 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_i
break;
/* dst = dst >> src */
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_X:
- emit_a32_lsr_r64(dst, src, dstk, sstk, ctx);
+ emit_a32_rsh_r64(dst, src, dstk, sstk, ctx);
break;
/* dst = dst >> src (signed) */
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X:
