[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUg5Yh0dE1AatTkSyHXcj5rheZjXZ+2pQW-YafL1XW5OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:43:51 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.5 1/2] seccomp: Make syscall skipping and nr changes
more consistent
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> This fixes two issues that could cause incompatibility between
> kernel versions:
>
> - If a tracer uses SECCOMP_RET_TRACE to select a syscall number
> higher than the largest known syscall, emulate the unknown
> vsyscall by returning -ENOSYS. (This is unlikely to make a
> noticeable difference on x86-64 due to the way the system call
> entry works.)
>
> - On x86-64 with vsyscall=emulate, skipped vsyscalls were buggy.
>
> This updates the documentation accordingly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
> ---
> Documentation/prctl/seccomp_filter.txt | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++---------------
> kernel/seccomp.c | 13 +++-
> 3 files changed, 137 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)
This is still necessary for vsyscall emulation to play nicely with
fancy seccomp tricks. Can any of you (James?) send it toward Linus?
We might want to tag this for -stable as well if it survives in the
3.6 tree for a while.
--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists