bpf: fix bpf_tail_call() x64 JIT

[ upstream commit 90caccdd8cc0215705f18b92771b449b01e2474a ]

- bpf prog_array just like all other types of bpf array accepts 32-bit index.
  Clarify that in the comment.
- fix x64 JIT of bpf_tail_call which was incorrectly loading 8 instead of 4 bytes
- tighten corresponding check in the interpreter to stay consistent

The JIT bug can be triggered after introduction of BPF_F_NUMA_NODE flag
in commit 96eabe7a40aa in 4.14. Before that the map_flags would stay zero and
though JIT code is wrong it will check bounds correctly.
Hence two fixes tags. All other JITs don't have this problem.

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Fixes: 96eabe7a40aa ("bpf: Allow selecting numa node during map creation")
Fixes: b52f00e6a715 ("x86: bpf_jit: implement bpf_tail_call() helper")
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Chatur27 <jasonbright2709@gmail.com>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 654d792e9e56..c36764361d61 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -284,9 +284,9 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call(u8 **pprog)
 	/* if (index >= array->map.max_entries)
 	 *   goto out;
 	 */
-	EMIT4(0x48, 0x8B, 0x46,                   /* mov rax, qword ptr [rsi + 16] */
+	EMIT2(0x89, 0xD2);                        /* mov edx, edx */
+	EMIT3(0x39, 0x56,                         /* cmp dword ptr [rsi + 16], edx */
 	      offsetof(struct bpf_array, map.max_entries));
-        EMIT3(0x48, 0x39, 0xD0);
 #define OFFSET1 (41 + RETPOLINE_RAX_BPF_JIT_SIZE) /* number of bytes to jump */
 	EMIT2(X86_JBE, OFFSET1);                  /* jbe out */
 	label1 = cnt;