From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tycho Andersen Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] seccomp: add a way to attach a filter via eBPF fd Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:24 -0600 Message-ID: <20150909144724.GZ26679@smitten> References: <1441382664-17437-1-git-send-email-tycho.andersen@canonical.com> <1441382664-17437-6-git-send-email-tycho.andersen@canonical.com> <55EA95FE.7000006@gmail.com> <20150908134044.GV26679@smitten> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" , Linux API , Alexei Starovoitov , Will Drewry , Oleg Nesterov , Andy Lutomirski , Pavel Emelyanov , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Daniel Borkmann , LKML , Network Development To: Kees Cook Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 05:07:03PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > Yeah, bpf's union looks good. Let's add a "command" flag, though: > > seccomp(SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER_EBPF, int cmd, union, size); > > And this cmd could be ADD_FD or something? > > How's that look? I think we can drop the size (using the same strategy as bpf() and checking for zeroes at the end), and keep the same signature for seccomp(); so: seccomp(SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER_EBPF, SECCOMP_ADD_BPF_FD, &union) Yes, I'll use this in the next version. Tycho