linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] powerpc: Wire up three syscalls

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANq1E4SCnDjN5yetrgtaRNdvDr7xqGOm1BXz7dbGvX3mnsm-MA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:34:03 +0200
From:	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>
To:	Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
	Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC..." <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] powerpc: Wire up three syscalls

Hi

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Geert,
>
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com> wrote:
>>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not wired
>>> because of which we get a warning while compilation.
>>>
>>> So I wired them up in this patch. What else needs to be done? I tried the
>>> memfd_test after compiling this kernel, but it is failing. What am I missing for
>>> this to work? Any advice is really appreciated! :)
>>
>> Did it fail due to the (silly) "ifeq ($(ARCH),X86)" checks in
>> tools/testing/selftests/memfd/Makefile?
>>
>
> I removed that check and compiled memfd_test.c by hand. This is the
> following error which I get when I run the test:
>
> $ ./memfd_test
> memfd: CREATE
> memfd: BASIC
> 10 != 0 = GET_SEALS(3)
> Aborted
>
> This is basically when checking the seals which we already added. It
> should return 10 (F_SEAL_SHRINK | F_SEAL_WRITE), instead it is returning 0.
>
> What else needs to be done for this to properly work? I see that for
> m68k, you just wired it up like in this patch. Did it work after that?

The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation:
    memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags);
via glibc as:
    syscall(__NR_memfd_create, name, flags);

Can you debug your test-run (maybe via simple printk() in mm/shmem.c
memfd_create()) and see what's going wrong there?

Thanks
David
--
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/