From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roland McGrath Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] seccomp_filters: system call filtering using BPF Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 09:34:31 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1327706681-11959-1-git-send-email-wad@chromium.org> <1327706681-11959-2-git-send-email-wad@chromium.org> <13b3f9dcf188908604a9529ef1934ecf.squirrel@webmail.greenhost.nl> <8a37c5805a9941a8616f1c28245a0880.squirrel@webmail.greenhost.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Will Drewry , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org, john.johansen@canonical.com, serge.hallyn@canonical.com, coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pmoore@redhat.com, eparis@redhat.com, djm@mindrot.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, segoon@openwall.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, jmorris@namei.org, scarybeasts@gmail.com, avi@redhat.com, penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, luto@mit.edu, mingo@elte.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, khilman@ti.com, borislav.petkov@amd.com, amwang@redhat.com, oleg@redhat.com, ak@linux.intel.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, gregkh@suse.de, dhowells@redhat.com, daniel.lezcano@free.fr, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, olofj@chromium.org, mhalcrow@google.com, dlaor@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk To: Indan Zupancic Return-path: Received: from mail-qw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.216.53]:63494 "EHLO mail-qw0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754193Ab2BARew (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2012 12:34:52 -0500 Received: by qafk1 with SMTP id k1so987165qaf.19 for ; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 09:34:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Indan Zupancic wrote: >> ref: http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0906.3/00096.html > > That's 2009! I wonder why no progress happened since then. At that time I did most of all the CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK work for ARM. The ARM kernel maintainers just weren't interested in paying attention, and I gave up on hounding them. Since then, only a subset of what I did before has actually been done and merged. (e.g. there is now some user_regset support, but less than what I implemented and posted originally--so for some ARM variants there is still register information only accessible via old ptrace calls but not in core dumps and no PTRACE_GETREGSET support. The really trivial stuff like using tracehook_report_* still hasn't gone in, though I posted that code back then too.) Thanks, Roland