From: takahiro.akashi@linaro.org (AKASHI Takahiro)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] selftests/seccomp: build on aarch64, document ABI
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 19:35:33 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55F15CF5.3000409@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150909193025.GA29244@www.outflux.net>
On 09/10/2015 04:30 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> The syscall ABI is inconsistent on aarch64 compat, so at least we should
> document it in the seccomp_bpf tests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> ---
> Can someone with access to native aarch64 double-check this for me? I
> think we need to change these tests to pass if it's expected, but the
> compat behavior seems bad. It means compat code will break under an
> aarch64 kernel, when dealing with syscalls, like through seccomp.
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> index 770f47adf295..866ff42e000d 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,10 @@
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <sys/syscall.h>
>
> +#if defined(__aarch64__) && !defined(__NR_poll)
> +# define __NR_poll 0x49
> +#endif
> +
> #include "test_harness.h"
>
> #ifndef PR_SET_PTRACER
> @@ -2124,10 +2128,17 @@ TEST(syscall_restart)
> ASSERT_EQ(SIGTRAP, WSTOPSIG(status));
> ASSERT_EQ(PTRACE_EVENT_SECCOMP, (status >> 16));
> ASSERT_EQ(0, ptrace(PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG, child_pid, NULL, &msg));
> - ASSERT_EQ(0x200, msg);
> +
> + /*
> + * FIXME:
> + * - native ARM does not expose true syscall.
> + * - compat ARM on ARM64 does expose true syscall.
> + * - native ARM64 hides true syscall even from seccomp.
Are you sure about the last line?
The kernel pushes __NR_compat_restart_syscall to w7 in compat mode, while
__NR_restart_syscall to x8 in native mode. But it is the only difference,
as far as I understand, in terms of restarting a system call.
So the behavior should be basically the same.
-Takahiro AKASHI
> + */
> + ASSERT_EQ(0x200, msg); /* This will fail on native arm64. */
> ret = get_syscall(_metadata, child_pid);
> #if defined(__arm__)
> - /* FIXME: ARM does not expose true syscall in registers. */
> + /* This will fail on arm64 in compat mode. */
> EXPECT_EQ(__NR_poll, ret);
> #else
> EXPECT_EQ(__NR_restart_syscall, ret);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-10 10:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-09 19:30 [PATCH] selftests/seccomp: build on aarch64, document ABI Kees Cook
2015-09-09 20:08 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-09 20:52 ` Kees Cook
2015-09-09 21:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-09 22:03 ` Kees Cook
2015-09-10 10:35 ` AKASHI Takahiro [this message]
2015-10-06 17:42 ` Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55F15CF5.3000409@linaro.org \
--to=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).