linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] riscv: add support for SECCOMP and SECCOMP

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: <CAEn-LTp=ss0Dfv6J00=rCAy+N78U2AmhqJNjfqjr2FDpPYjxEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:04:21 -0700
From:   David Abdurachmanov <david.abdurachmanov@...il.com>
To:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>
Cc:     Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        David Abdurachmanov <david.abdurachmanov@...ive.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
        Alexios Zavras <alexios.zavras@...el.com>,
        Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@....com>,
        Vincent Chen <vincentc@...estech.com>,
        Alan Kao <alankao@...estech.com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, me@...losedp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] riscv: add support for SECCOMP and SECCOMP_FILTER

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 5:30 PM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2019, David Abdurachmanov wrote:
>
> > There is one failing kernel selftest: global.user_notification_signal
>
> Is this the only failing test?  Or are the rest of the selftests skipped
> when this test fails, and no further tests are run, as seems to be shown
> here:
>
>   https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/CADnnUqcmDMRe1f+3jG8SPR6jRrnBsY8VVD70VbKEm0NqYeoicA@mail.gmail.com/

Yes, it's a single test failing. After removing global.user_notification_signal
test everything else pass and you get the results printed.

>
> For example, looking at the source, I'd naively expect to see the
> user_notification_closed_listener test result -- which follows right
> after the failing test in the selftest source.  But there aren't any
> results?

Yes, it hangs at this point. You have to manually terminate it.

>
> Also - could you follow up with the author of this failing test to see if
> we can get some more clarity about what might be going wrong here?  It
> appears that the failing test was added in commit 6a21cc50f0c7f ("seccomp:
> add a return code to trap to userspace") by Tycho Andersen
> <tycho@...ho.ws>.

Well the code states ".. and hope that it doesn't break when there
is actually a signal :)". Maybe we are just unlucky. I don't have results
from other architectures to compare.

I found that Linaro is running selftests, but SECCOMP is disabled
and thus it's failing. Is there another CI which tracks selftests?

https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-oe/tests/kselftest/seccomp_seccomp_bpf?top=next-20190823

>
>
> - Paul