MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jLmby_HX6NwT5Nwr5vXT1vLVpxBpt1a4qbpxMMWTdrXmw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHse=S8UeYVJqRBx-_wf=jeDERTJxzM=YRH5izBpQnrCHOxcDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <55CCB510.3060807@redhat.com> <CAHse=S8BrL6KeQL9gwa=9TH0nqWrNxq7rcHc--pAVriG+pxBmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALCETrXP0bH9nhh=aOPsiA-Bs0zNW_0xbXFhvbMPZeDV71VtZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHse=S8OuPb4KFWBXJS6c9YdGPEH8MgpbWJ5qP79r04+4rK2Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5j+gXShOAdK93KuVide93VYA_ObyjbK-zb7CwgOLc2JCnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <55CD0DAC.9080809@redhat.com> <CALCETrWj6X+zCX47iHip0Qjp88p7f3p0uWvskL357XCyvPrXVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFyA9+16Jer2nKMOs6_uhRA-egvFDSR8fgNoD9AuPLE4GQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFx6Ade9UwDQ2KgsQgVMog+B9VXNYqrb1vm+EvBbkazhuA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGXu5jLmby_HX6NwT5Nwr5vXT1vLVpxBpt1a4qbpxMMWTdrXmw@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 08:33:03 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHse=S_TcuCC8jREskuvghL_C_DvqLFfp2j1RCASFUMT+QNKBA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Regression v4.2 ?] 32-bit seccomp-BPF returned errno values
 wrong in VM?
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1011
Lines: 28

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Does the attached patch make sense and work?
>>
>> Btw, I'm not all that happy with it anyway.
>>
>> I still think Denys' patch also potentially changed what audit and
>> strace see for %rax in the pt_regs to -ENOSYS, which I'm not convinced
>> is a good change.
>>
>> But maybe that three-liner patch fixes the immediate problem that
>> David sees. David?
>
> Your patch fixes it for me. The seccomp compat selftests pass again
> with audit enabled.
>
> -Kees

Yep, that patch fixes it for me too.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/