Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf

Alexei Starovoitov says:

====================
pull-request: bpf 2021-03-04

The following pull-request contains BPF updates for your *net* tree.

We've added 7 non-merge commits during the last 4 day(s) which contain
a total of 9 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-).

The main changes are:

1) Fix 32-bit cmpxchg, from Brendan.

2) Fix atomic+fetch logic, from Ilya.

3) Fix usage of bpf_csum_diff in selftests, from Yauheni.
====================

5 files changed, 65 insertions, 6 deletions

diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/xsk.c b/tools/lib/bpf/xsk.c
index ffbb588724d8..526fc35c0b23 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/xsk.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/xsk.c
@@ -610,15 +610,16 @@ static int xsk_lookup_bpf_maps(struct xsk_socket *xsk)
 		if (fd < 0)
 			continue;
 
+		memset(&map_info, 0, map_len);
 		err = bpf_obj_get_info_by_fd(fd, &map_info, &map_len);
 		if (err) {
 			close(fd);
 			continue;
 		}
 
-		if (!strcmp(map_info.name, "xsks_map")) {
+		if (!strncmp(map_info.name, "xsks_map", sizeof(map_info.name))) {
 			ctx->xsks_map_fd = fd;
-			continue;
+			break;
 		}
 
 		close(fd);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c
index 6b670039ea67..1d8918dfbd3f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c
@@ -16,6 +16,13 @@ bool skip = false;
 #define STRSIZE			2048
 #define EXPECTED_STRSIZE	256
 
+#if defined(bpf_target_s390)
+/* NULL points to a readable struct lowcore on s390, so take the last page */
+#define BADPTR			((void *)0xFFFFFFFFFFFFF000ULL)
+#else
+#define BADPTR			0
+#endif
+
 #ifndef ARRAY_SIZE
 #define ARRAY_SIZE(x)	(sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0]))
 #endif
@@ -113,11 +120,11 @@ int BPF_PROG(trace_netif_receive_skb, struct sk_buff *skb)
 	}
 
 	/* Check invalid ptr value */
-	p.ptr = 0;
+	p.ptr = BADPTR;
 	__ret = bpf_snprintf_btf(str, STRSIZE, &p, sizeof(p), 0);
 	if (__ret >= 0) {
-		bpf_printk("printing NULL should generate error, got (%d)",
-			   __ret);
+		bpf_printk("printing %llx should generate error, got (%d)",
+			   (unsigned long long)BADPTR, __ret);
 		ret = -ERANGE;
 	}
 
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c
index bed53b561e04..1b138cd2b187 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c
@@ -250,12 +250,13 @@
 	BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
 	BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
 		     BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
+	BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 0xffff),
 	BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
 	},
 	.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 	.fixup_map_array_ro = { 3 },
 	.result = ACCEPT,
-	.retval = -29,
+	.retval = 65507,
 },
 {
 	"invalid write map access into a read-only array 1",
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c
index 2efd8bcf57a1..6e52dfc64415 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c
@@ -94,3 +94,28 @@
 	.result = REJECT,
 	.errstr = "invalid read from stack",
 },
+{
+	"BPF_W cmpxchg should zero top 32 bits",
+	.insns = {
+		/* r0 = U64_MAX; */
+		BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+		BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_0, 1),
+		/* u64 val = r0; */
+		BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
+		/* r0 = (u32)atomic_cmpxchg((u32 *)&val, r0, 1); */
+		BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1),
+		BPF_ATOMIC_OP(BPF_W, BPF_CMPXCHG, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
+		/* r1 = 0x00000000FFFFFFFFull; */
+		BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1),
+		BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 32),
+		BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 1),
+		/* if (r0 != r1) exit(1); */
+		BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 2),
+		BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
+		BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+		/* exit(0); */
+		BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+		BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+	},
+	.result = ACCEPT,
+},
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_or.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_or.c
index 70f982e1f9f0..9d0716ac5080 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_or.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_or.c
@@ -75,3 +75,28 @@
 	},
 	.result = ACCEPT,
 },
+{
+	"BPF_W atomic_fetch_or should zero top 32 bits",
+	.insns = {
+		/* r1 = U64_MAX; */
+		BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+		BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 1),
+		/* u64 val = r1; */
+		BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
+		/* r1 = (u32)atomic_fetch_or((u32 *)&val, 2); */
+		BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 2),
+		BPF_ATOMIC_OP(BPF_W, BPF_OR | BPF_FETCH, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
+		/* r2 = 0x00000000FFFFFFFF; */
+		BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 1),
+		BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_2, 32),
+		BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_2, 1),
+		/* if (r2 != r1) exit(1); */
+		BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
+		BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+		BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+		/* exit(0); */
+		BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+		BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+	},
+	.result = ACCEPT,
+},