From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59072) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TUHxQ-0002fJ-Vg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:10:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TUHxO-0003np-Kw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:10:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42201) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TUHxO-0003nS-CP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:10:46 -0400 From: Paul Moore Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:10:42 -0400 Message-ID: <10017800.oNGNGaarnI@sifl> In-Reply-To: <20121102022936.GC6863@bluepex.com> References: <1350971732-16621-1-git-send-email-otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <2070927.ckAog9Xh3T@sifl> <20121102022936.GC6863@bluepex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 1/4] Adding new syscalls (bugzilla 855162) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Otubo Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Friday, November 02, 2012 12:29:37 AM Eduardo Otubo wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 05:43:03PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 23, 2012 03:55:29 AM Eduardo Otubo wrote: > > > According to the bug 855162[0] - there's the need of adding new syscalls > > > to the whitelist whenn using Qemu with Libvirt. > > > > > > [0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855162 > > > > > > v2: Adding new syscalls to the list: readlink, rt_sigpending, and > > > > > > rt_sigtimedwait > > > > > > Reported-by: Paul Moore > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Otubo > > > --- > > > > > > qemu-seccomp.c | 13 ++++++++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > I had an opportunity to test this patchset on a F17 machine using QEMU 1.2 > > and unfortunately it still fails. I'm using a relatively basic guest > > configuration running F16, the details are documented in the RH BZ that > > Eduardo mentioned in the patch description. > > > > Eduardo, I assume you are not able to reproduce this? > > Unfortunately no. But we have the v3 patchset coming soon with new > syscalls and we're hoping to get this fixed. Thanks for the feedback > Paul! No problem, thanks for all your work on this patchset. -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat