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=-4.1 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 11763C433E3 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 20:04:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2D6207BC for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 20:04:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="R2wl2O3b" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729611AbgGPUEl (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2020 16:04:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43128 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729048AbgGPUEk (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2020 16:04:40 -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 8E1F7C08C5C0 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:04:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1044.google.com with SMTP id k71so5341076pje.0 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:04:40 -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=8cjlPgn09p7l40db0k5FtyWMlNcHlH5a0ko12DoYDl8=; b=R2wl2O3bAKRmcG8CwSs2Q1w5Hfu4lrQCtvgaHOXYz089uxJGqL7jfyozh0dElVhkht HihXpzUVBYBgCTDp49G6vJod1zIH+8LnNuatOpdSaa02mG64zIzslDVh2t4P2ws/pltF 4GmSr2KOtIN649ayUtFptrou3zZo1Q2nqVrD8= 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=8cjlPgn09p7l40db0k5FtyWMlNcHlH5a0ko12DoYDl8=; b=fy731MVGaHKg+12ckmgVD7Ir01j87soJcowRTP7tyvQkRD7+c9jiuoOghk9N4+QDNX F/mLUU7ALI1K+05uz78VYzFzYWEN7fMRi4SSVKHQeyiwYHbLIOFec6uzE/QdBs3fvI9+ ahsqHTqN3ec6T1FxdQQ+YEB5AC6JtrweK1Gp4ZS8FgWFlRyjMp3ePy3CqMdusp1u71w/ R9UTEMv4lEUUvZUc98WYeSiuwNQaJaqmGwicJ6j6ZKxwiMnVQFKVzMV9vIA89RqH9HHW 4hmFtUS48upMDiacNouYehMXfaNelSKAowJAfW+iD9XRJLbmniAwudDz0DPpWgSW6VXj /5oQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532E9o6o+oW14BgOqEZ9yiTHZHVG2OATmV2bkfIEu3fTa43rMEUO llR1iTwua8AnIWC6PZ7GZ8qo3A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzQmwwQY4qaLuGuH2c57JaOLP7yXkUxTXHj7pOsYZEf+Uu5diFNUB050bd6hczoiR9qcdlZ9g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:a50d:: with SMTP id a13mr6205936pjq.95.1594929879858; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y19sm5695800pgj.35.2020.07.16.13.04.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:04:38 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi , Andy Lutomirski , Matthew Wilcox Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@collabora.com, gofmanp@gmail.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Syscall User Redirection Message-ID: <202007161300.7452A2C5@keescook> References: <20200716193141.4068476-1-krisman@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200716193141.4068476-1-krisman@collabora.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 03:31:39PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote: > This is v4 of Syscall User Redirection. The implementation itself is > not modified from v3, it only applies the latest round of reviews to the > selftests. > > __NR_syscalls is not really exported in header files other than > asm-generic for every architecture, so it felt safer to optionally > expose it with a fallback to a high value. > > Also, I didn't expose tests for PR_GET as that is not currently > implemented. If possible, I'd have it supported by a future patchset, > since it is not immediately necessary to support this feature. Thanks! That all looks good to me. > Finally, one question: Which tree would this go through? I haven't heard from several other x86 maintainers yet (which is where I would normally expect this series to land), but I would be comfortable taking this through my seccomp tree if I got Acks/Reviews at least from Andy and Matthew. Andy, Matthew, what do you think of this? -- Kees Cook