Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754253AbbHNL6M (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2015 07:58:12 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35910 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752133AbbHNL6L (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2015 07:58:11 -0400 Message-ID: <55CDD7CE.5070503@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 13:58:06 +0200 From: Denys Vlasenko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andy Lutomirski , Kees Cook CC: Linus Torvalds , David Drysdale , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Will Drewry , Ingo Molnar , Alok Kataria , Borislav Petkov , Alexei Starovoitov , Frederic Weisbecker , "H. Peter Anvin" , Oleg Nesterov , Steven Rostedt , X86 ML Subject: Re: [Regression v4.2 ?] 32-bit seccomp-BPF returned errno values wrong in VM? References: <55CCB510.3060807@redhat.com> <55CD0DAC.9080809@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1360 Lines: 33 On 08/14/2015 12:59 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Linus Torvalds >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Linus Torvalds >>> 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, would it be straightforward to rig up the seccomp tests to > automatically test compat? The x86 selftests automatically test both > native and compat, and that might be usable as a model. I did that > because it's extremely easy to regress one and not the other. BTW, why 64-bt code doesn't need this RAX read-back? -- 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/