From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44176) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XmJJE-0008Kk-KD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 04:24:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XmJJ8-0000ba-IO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 04:24:52 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com ([209.85.212.169]:57734) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XmJJ8-0000bP-BD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 04:24:46 -0500 Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id n3so808464wiv.4 for ; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 01:24:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 10:24:41 +0100 From: Eduardo Otubo Message-ID: <20141106092440.GA16381@vader> References: <1415206067-8594-1-git-send-email-eduardo.otubo@profitbricks.com> <1730772.DqyRfLzkMU@sifl> <2511814.5UZKhYSZ5W@sifl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2511814.5UZKhYSZ5W@sifl> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] seccomp: change configure to avoid arm 32 to break List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Moore Cc: Peter Maydell , QEMU Developers , Philipp Gesang On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:35:09PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wednesday, November 05, 2014 08:08:06 PM Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 5 November 2014 19:46, Paul Moore wrote: > > > On Wednesday, November 05, 2014 05:08:20 PM Peter Maydell wrote: > > >> On 5 November 2014 16:47, Eduardo Otubo wrote: > > >> > Right now seccomp is breaking the compilation of Qemu on armv7l due > > >> > to libsecomp current lack of support for this arch. This problem is > > >> > already fixed on libseccomp upstream but no release date for that is > > >> > scheduled to far. This patch disables support for seccomp on armv7l > > >> > temporarily until libseccomp does a new release. Then I'll remove the > > >> > hack and update libseccomp dependency on configure script. > > >> > > > >> > Related bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1363641 > > > > > > ... > > > > > >> (How are upstream proposing to fix this anyway? I couldn't > > >> figure that out from the mailing list thread.) > > > > > > The problem was that the released version of libseccomp has some "holes" > > > in > > > the internal syscall table for 32-bit ARM with respect to all of the other > > > supported architectures. The current libseccomp upstream has some > > > additional tooling and checks to ensure that the different ABI syscall > > > tables are kept in sync to prevent something like this from happening in > > > the future. > > > > OK. So should we make QEMU say "if x86_64 or i386, require > > seccomp 2.1 or better, else require 2.2 or better"? I don't think it's worth to point to a non existing version right now, it might confuse people. > > I would probably just limit QEMU/seccomp to x86_64 and x86. Once we have the > new release that fixes everything we can start worrying about versions and > different ABIs. That's fine for me, since is a temporary fix. I'll just go and rewrite this patch, then. Paul, do you have any plans for a new libseccomp release? Regards, -- Eduardo Otubo ProfitBricks GmbH