From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 19:43:32 +0100
Subject: bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
Patch-mainline: v5.18-rc1
Git-commit: 9a69e2b385f443f244a7e8b8bcafe5ccfb0866b4
References: jsc#PED-1377

remote_port is another case of a BPF context field documented as a 32-bit
value in network byte order for which the BPF context access converter
generates a load of a zero-padded 16-bit integer in network byte order.

First such case was dst_port in bpf_sock which got addressed in commit
4421a582718a ("bpf: Make dst_port field in struct bpf_sock 16-bit wide").

Loading 4-bytes from the remote_port offset and converting the value with
bpf_ntohl() leads to surprising results, as the expected value is shifted
by 16 bits.

Reduce the confusion by splitting the field in two - a 16-bit field holding
a big-endian integer, and a 16-bit zero-padding anonymous field that
follows it.

Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220209184333.654927-2-jakub@cloudflare.com
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
---
 include/uapi/linux/bpf.h |    3 ++-
 net/bpf/test_run.c       |    4 ++--
 net/core/filter.c        |    3 ++-
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

--- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
@@ -6453,7 +6453,8 @@ struct bpf_sk_lookup {
 	__u32 protocol;		/* IP protocol (IPPROTO_TCP, IPPROTO_UDP) */
 	__u32 remote_ip4;	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 remote_ip6[4];	/* Network byte order */
-	__u32 remote_port;	/* Network byte order */
+	__be16 remote_port;	/* Network byte order */
+	__u16 :16;		/* Zero padding */
 	__u32 local_ip4;	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 local_ip6[4];	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 local_port;	/* Host byte order */
--- a/net/bpf/test_run.c
+++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c
@@ -1147,7 +1147,7 @@ int bpf_prog_test_run_sk_lookup(struct b
 	if (!range_is_zero(user_ctx, offsetofend(typeof(*user_ctx), local_port), sizeof(*user_ctx)))
 		goto out;
 
-	if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {
+	if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX) {
 		ret = -ERANGE;
 		goto out;
 	}
@@ -1155,7 +1155,7 @@ int bpf_prog_test_run_sk_lookup(struct b
 	ctx.family = (u16)user_ctx->family;
 	ctx.protocol = (u16)user_ctx->protocol;
 	ctx.dport = (u16)user_ctx->local_port;
-	ctx.sport = (__force __be16)user_ctx->remote_port;
+	ctx.sport = user_ctx->remote_port;
 
 	switch (ctx.family) {
 	case AF_INET:
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -10856,7 +10856,8 @@ static bool sk_lookup_is_valid_access(in
 	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_ip4):
 	case bpf_ctx_range_till(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_ip6[0], remote_ip6[3]):
 	case bpf_ctx_range_till(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_ip6[0], local_ip6[3]):
-	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_port):
+	case offsetof(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_port) ...
+	     offsetof(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_ip4) - 1:
 	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_port):
 	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, ingress_ifindex):
 		bpf_ctx_record_field_size(info, sizeof(__u32));