This is a note to let you know that I have just added a patch titled
arm64: bpf: fix div-by-zero case
to the linux-4.2.y-queue branch of the 4.2.y-ckt extended stable tree
which can be found at:
http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git/ubuntu/linux.git/log/?h=linux-4.2.y-queue
This patch is schedu
This is a note to let you know that I have just added a patch titled
arm64: bpf: fix div-by-zero case
to the linux-3.19.y-queue branch of the 3.19.y-ckt extended stable tree
which can be found at:
http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git/ubuntu/linux.git/log/?h=linux-3.19.y-queue
This patch is sch
On 11/04/2015 07:41 PM, Shi, Yang wrote:
...
Agreed, and we may need add one more test cases in test_bpf module to cover
MOD?
Let me know if you have a test case ready :)
Does the below change look like a valid test?
+ "MOD default X",
+ .u.insns = {
+
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Shi, Yang wrote:
> On 11/3/2015 11:04 PM, Xi Wang wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
>>>
>>> case BPF_ALU | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
>>> case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
>>> + {
>>> + const u8 r0 = bpf2a
On 11/4/2015 10:25 AM, Z Lim wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Shi, Yang wrote:
On 11/3/2015 11:04 PM, Xi Wang wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
case BPF_ALU | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
+ {
+ co
On 11/3/2015 11:04 PM, Xi Wang wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
case BPF_ALU | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
+ {
+ const u8 r0 = bpf2a64[BPF_REG_0];
+
+ /* if (src == 0) return 0 */
+
On 11/3/2015 10:56 PM, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
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 86bf1721b226
("test_bpf: add tests checking that JIT/interpr
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
> case BPF_ALU | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
> case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
> + {
> + const u8 r0 = bpf2a64[BPF_REG_0];
> +
> + /* if (src == 0) return 0 */
> + jmp_offset = 3; /* skip ahe
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 86bf1721b226
("test_bpf: add tests checking that JIT/interpreter sets A and X to 0.").
Reported-by: Shi
9 matches
Mail list logo
