From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB264161321 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:40:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736966455; cv=none; b=ZpShm3mE7kN7ztpdZjguR9mrWI2Qko5TZHaumY79pw53iOqr8N0N16lHeeLSk2AscRwWNudEBE5XyJe3HuVCzX/rMurWjOstcdzhJQv9RrTrHOC6Cz2KmVXGtH8Yx7hmPzi0ihhPDTy8HRhcyL1fGUi29/fIfkDe9WQeIpcFTkc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736966455; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ULYV6vPS38W6ety7Kx46JofgK8h7cFKQee0mLC8CXaw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=S+maMyCkcePPVe7YhbuDeHflxgAN2B0C4w3BDu1FAj2JNjeoEJ5yp2B1G1oS+AANMPjle/1g4UGIhVCJG9/2PrXtrzApgwuxcrzOpD3Nzt77YjYNbF0FN5EwbrmFiVp6Q+wdJTLLrZEzG5CQzwhnSVuWguJDIoodXpcxIBql+P4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=MvvBnS0A; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="MvvBnS0A" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1736966452; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ULYV6vPS38W6ety7Kx46JofgK8h7cFKQee0mLC8CXaw=; b=MvvBnS0ABTEly7jLHuTnE3g/TOmCII+FX+miRNxwFvgiYDIjLrjWaauvspGrS4U/FTYwex qatS8eVyjP1vFlYJlrv8lmo+6cPz6r5p3pk7wuY5gsZcktv8s4MpDMklaVPsK1TG++Of/j u9imXoGcInMxfsSSuNnswgppdFUwzBA= Received: from mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-19-J7KBZUA8N2WRE87S8xnsbQ-1; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:40:49 -0500 X-MC-Unique: J7KBZUA8N2WRE87S8xnsbQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: J7KBZUA8N2WRE87S8xnsbQ Received: from mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F23961956083; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:40:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.45.224.35]) by mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 23A7A19560AA; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:40:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:40:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:40:11 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Jiri Olsa , Eyal Birger , Aleksa Sarai , Masami Hiramatsu , linux-kernel , linux-trace-kernel , BPF-dev-list , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , X86 ML , Linux API , Andrii Nakryiko , Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , "rostedt@goodmis.org" , rafi@rbk.io, Shmulik Ladkani Subject: Re: Crash when attaching uretprobes to processes running in Docker Message-ID: <20250115184011.GA21801@redhat.com> References: <20250110.152323-sassy.torch.lavish.rent-vKX3ul5B3qyi@cyphar.com> <20250114143313.GA29305@redhat.com> <20250114172519.GB29305@redhat.com> <20250115150607.GA11980@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.40 On 01/15, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 7:06 AM Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > Or we can change __secure_computing() to do nothing if > > this_syscall == __NR_uretprobe. > > I think that's the best way forward. > seccomp already allowlists sigreturn syscall. Only if SECCOMP_MODE_STRICT. But it won't help if we add __NR_uretprobe into into mode1_syscalls/mode1_syscalls_32. SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER can do anything. Just I guess nobody tries to offend sigreturn for obvious reasons. But yes, perhaps we do not have a better solution. Oleg.