[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190301151937.GE7413@cisco>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 08:19:37 -0700
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>
To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Aleksa Sarai <asarai@...e.de>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
Akihiro Suda <suda.akihiro@....ntt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] seccomp.2: document userspace notification
On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:16:27PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hello Tycho,
>
> On 3/1/19 3:53 PM, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 01:52:19PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> >>> +a notification will be sent to this fd. See "Userspace Notification" below for
> >>
> >> s/fd/file descriptor/ throughout please.
> >
> > Will do.
> >
> >>> +more details.
> >>
> >> I think the description here could be better worded as something like:
> >>
> >> SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER
> >> Register a new filter, as usual, but on success return a
> >> new file descriptor that provides user-space notifications.
> >> When the filter returns SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF, a notification
> >> will be provided via this file descriptor. The close-on-exec
> >> flag is automatically set on the new file descriptor. ...
> >>
> >>> .RE
> >>> .TP
> >>> .BR SECCOMP_GET_ACTION_AVAIL " (since Linux 4.14)"
> >>> @@ -606,6 +613,17 @@ file.
> >>> .TP
> >>> .BR SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW
> >>> This value results in the system call being executed.
> >>> +.TP
> >>> +.BR SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF " (since Linux 4.21)"
> >>
> >> Please see the start of this hanging list in the manual page.
> >> Can you confirm that SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF really is the lowest
> >> in the precedence order of all of the filter return values?
> >
> > Oh, no, I didn't realize it was in a particular order. I'll switch it.
>
> Just for my immediate education (I'm experimenting right now),
> where/how does it fit in the precedence order?
In between RET_ERRNO and RET_TRACE; see include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
for details.
Tycho
Powered by blists - more mailing lists