From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA0E5C433F1 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 16:11:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8524520720 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 16:11:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="PHEEFw8F" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728172AbgGJQLX (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 12:11:23 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59680 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727943AbgGJQLG (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 12:11:06 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1044.google.com (mail-pj1-x1044.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1044]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DBB3C08C5DD for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1044.google.com with SMTP id k71so2818575pje.0 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=3EszjAuKdLbRnLB9pftKo+oJnCDcBS1AwarADCNsweE=; b=PHEEFw8FOundyfqG7JLa9MXMuK6G9bG7jR0cukBcJ09z6qm4KnexC3gg/iT6blS98N mkC3YbIW/7Pmzw2t14kgOnIQD+8e0dDhCPfGLjCARjpogHk+qsgU0f2fKSladHEfzbCY 7+Uy/5bRQPCKIawnMf4jcUp1vQQ9aTTrBhYtQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=3EszjAuKdLbRnLB9pftKo+oJnCDcBS1AwarADCNsweE=; b=WQ750Lyaa4PteNYiMrFQhr7ee/KlPW9l5eKIMZPmfIvuDPpXh3iP6xqNpGBQ6cEe45 XkJ0drzrLQQze1Ni0t6GRSEfSFL4bl2BQLIWOrXNmaF1NiFgtTbT+qZlbNIj9my+qBFl XF8FZPqLo2eMEXG/QjocvQ9Va4Pj5NHUTV84tpvooamH91LpnS4G6chxVd6eMJTMTJNS Qa/2NkPO1A3asHEVeSe2f0FIM9dYnp9NDbqUbf8Oljlb/XJfQVqx/jWBshvG+B2754SD GxMdwi1koAN4TkejcBLjDvm2hBgRNNbYlU+muSmPM42a7JX2WpckKGTx8I5+2XlpmUOA BhdQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531U33c+OcSsE/U75W6C7kYZ2QnqxixvqwfegF45ERmi5+zABxqk LUMri5msddRR8wVB20JsJGdkhD1kG0o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwBZWBRUiVm74i+SNKREYZliBSAgKh8do9o20x4bZ5qPhfKMpuRyev1GYSUF/IyzDwxG+x0Dw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b40f:: with SMTP id x15mr22554817plr.329.1594397465470; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 09:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q24sm6669112pfg.34.2020.07.10.09.11.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 09:11:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 09:11:03 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Will Deacon Cc: Keno Fischer , Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , Oleg Nesterov , Shuah Khan , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next/seccomp 0/3] Check ENOSYS under tracing Message-ID: <202007100910.79661A4@keescook> References: <20200705061232.4151319-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20200710124033.GA30458@willie-the-truck> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200710124033.GA30458@willie-the-truck> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 01:40:33PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 11:12:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > This expands the seccomp selftest to poke a architectural behavior corner > > that Keno Fischer noticed[1]. In the process, I took the opportunity > > to do the kselftest harness variant refactoring I'd been meaning to do, > > which made adding this test much nicer. > > > > I'd prefer this went via the seccomp tree, as it builds on top of the > > other recent seccomp feature addition tests. Testing and reviews are > > welcome! :) > > Thanks! I tested these on arm64 (qemu) and they helped me to find a bug > in some patches I was writing. Hurray for tests! :) > Tested-by: Will Deacon Thanks! -- Kees Cook