From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 16:41:25 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: Add seccomp support In-Reply-To: <530497DD.2020806@linaro.org> References: <1391767892-5395-1-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <1391767892-5395-2-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <20140218153856.GB904@localhost> <530497DD.2020806@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20140219164125.GD22252@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:39:09AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > On 02/19/2014 12:38 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 10:11:31AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c > >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c > >> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ > >> #include > >> #include > >> #include > >> +#include > >> #include > >> #include > >> #include > >> @@ -1064,6 +1065,10 @@ asmlinkage int syscall_trace(int dir, struct pt_regs *regs) > >> { > >> unsigned long saved_reg; > >> > >> + if (!dir && secure_computing((int)regs->syscallno)) > >> + /* seccomp failures shouldn't expose any additional code. */ > >> + return -1; > > > > That's only restricted to the arm64 code but could we use a more > > meaningful error number? > > Other architectures, including arm, also return just -1 in syscall_trace_enter(), > but of course, we can use another value, say, -EPERM or -ENOSYS? Actually we have another case of setting regs->syscallno = ~0UL in the same function, so we could do the same (also in line with entry.S). -- Catalin