bpf: fix replace_map_fd_with_map_ptr's ldimm64 second imm field

Non-zero imm value in the second part of the ldimm64 instruction for
BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD is invalid, and thus must be rejected. The map fd
only ever sits in the first instructions' imm field. None of the BPF
loaders known to us are using it, so risk of regression is minimal.
For clarity and consistency, the few insn->{src_reg,imm} occurrences
are rewritten into insn[0].{src_reg,imm}. Add a test case to the BPF
selftest suite as well.

Fixes: 0246e64d9a5f ("bpf: handle pseudo BPF_LD_IMM64 insn")
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>

1 files changed, 14 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c
index 28b8c805a293..3856dba733e9 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@
         .insns = {
         BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
         BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
-        BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 1),
+        BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 0),
         BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
         },
         .errstr = "not pointing to valid bpf_map",
@@ -139,3 +139,16 @@
         .errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
         .result = REJECT,
 },
+{
+        "test14 ld_imm64: reject 2nd imm != 0",
+        .insns = {
+        BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+        BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1,
+                     BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD, 0, 0),
+        BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 0xfefefe),
+        BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+        },
+        .fixup_map_hash_48b = { 1 },
+        .errstr = "unrecognized bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
+        .result = REJECT,
+},