[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLmby_HX6NwT5Nwr5vXT1vLVpxBpt1a4qbpxMMWTdrXmw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:56:45 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [Regression v4.2 ?] 32-bit seccomp-BPF returned errno values
wrong in VM?
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-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
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
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