Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 29 Mar 2019 13:56:35 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     David Abdurachmanov <david.abdurachmanov@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
        Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: fix syscall_get_arguments() and
 syscall_set_arguments()
Message-ID: <20190329135635.7e136350@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <CAEn-LTpY6Tto1N9irXJeOb4iB=qSYhb=jM0E=Z9ppumbPX6GSw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20190329171221.GA32456@altlinux.org>
        <20190329131514.3e4ec93e@gandalf.local.home>
        <CAEn-LTpY6Tto1N9irXJeOb4iB=qSYhb=jM0E=Z9ppumbPX6GSw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:52:18 +0100
David Abdurachmanov <david.abdurachmanov@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have alternative version posted in December part of SECCOMP
> patchset which is based on arm64 implementation.
> 
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-riscv/2018-December/002450.html
> 
> I noticed that SECCOMP wasn't working properly if filters were
> checking syscall arguments, because populated arguments were wrong.
> 
> Btw, I plan to send v2 of SECCOMP patchset soonish.

Please do. I want to get my patch series out, which will require these
changes.

-- Steve