From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40999)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pmoore@redhat.com>) id 1TGugp-0001ML-1z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:42:27 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pmoore@redhat.com>) id 1TGugf-0007gj-Iu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:42:22 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:32468)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pmoore@redhat.com>) id 1TGugf-0007gb-AL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:42:13 -0400
From: Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:42:09 -0400
Message-ID: <1652672.gixJlFW1o6@sifl>
In-Reply-To: <20120926162453.GA12076@bluepex.com>
References: <1348174859-24809-1-git-send-email-otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1559484.FIy5X4RP1O@sifl> <20120926162453.GA12076@bluepex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] New syscalls to the seccomp whitelist
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wednesday, September 26, 2012 01:24:54 PM Eduardo Otubo wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:14:29AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 20, 2012 06:00:59 PM Eduardo Otubo wrote:
> > > Seccomp syscall whitelist updated after tests running qemu under
> > > libvirt ...
> > 
> > Hi Eduardo,
> > 
> > I know from our discussions offlist that you have an additional debugging
> > patch to help identify missing syscalls, perhaps you could also submit
> > that patch too?  I think we would want the debugging patch #ifdef'd out in
> > normal use, but I think it might help the QEMU developers.
> 
> That's surely a good thing Paul. I'll rebase my patches and send it
> right away.  Thanks!

Great, I think that will be a nice addition.

Also, FWIW, I don't think you need to rebase/resubmit the patch you already 
sent, just port your debugging patch to go on top.

-- 
paul moore
security and virtualization @ redhat