From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757853AbbFQHbj (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2015 03:31:39 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:39245 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753617AbbFQHbd (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2015 03:31:33 -0400 Message-ID: <1434526286.28933.2.camel@ellerman.id.au> Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: add seccomp suite From: Michael Ellerman To: Kees Cook Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Borkmann , Shuah Khan , Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , Andrew Morton , Greg KH , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , "David S. Miller" , Arnd Bergmann , Joe Perches , Jingoo Han , linux-api@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 17:31:26 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20150616175414.GA24958@www.outflux.net> References: <20150616175414.GA24958@www.outflux.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.10-0ubuntu1~14.10.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 10:54 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > This imports the existing seccomp test suite into the kernel's selftests > tree. It contains extensive testing of seccomp features and corner cases. > There remain additional tests to move into the kernel tree, but they have > not yet been ported to all the architectures seccomp supports: > https://github.com/redpig/seccomp/tree/master/tests > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > --- > MAINTAINERS | 1 + > tools/testing/selftests/Makefile | 1 + > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/.gitignore | 1 + > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/Makefile | 10 + > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 2109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h | 537 ++++++ Thanks very much for adding this, it would have been very helpful recently when I was trying to get seccomp filter working on powerpc :) I get one failure in TRACE_syscall.syscall_dropped: seccomp_bpf.c:1394:TRACE_syscall.syscall_dropped:Expected 1 (1) == syscall(207) (18446744073709551615) So it looks like we're returning -1 instead of 1. That's probably a bug in our handling of the return value, or maybe an inconsistency across the arches. I'll try and find time to dig into it. cheers From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: add seccomp suite Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 17:31:26 +1000 Message-ID: <1434526286.28933.2.camel@ellerman.id.au> References: <20150616175414.GA24958@www.outflux.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150616175414.GA24958-0X9Bc/hWBUTk6RaD4rd5nQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Kees Cook Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Daniel Borkmann , Shuah Khan , Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , Andrew Morton , Greg KH , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , "David S. Miller" , Arnd Bergmann , Joe Perches , Jingoo Han , linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 10:54 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > This imports the existing seccomp test suite into the kernel's selftests > tree. It contains extensive testing of seccomp features and corner cases. > There remain additional tests to move into the kernel tree, but they have > not yet been ported to all the architectures seccomp supports: > https://github.com/redpig/seccomp/tree/master/tests > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > --- > MAINTAINERS | 1 + > tools/testing/selftests/Makefile | 1 + > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/.gitignore | 1 + > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/Makefile | 10 + > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 2109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h | 537 ++++++ Thanks very much for adding this, it would have been very helpful recently when I was trying to get seccomp filter working on powerpc :) I get one failure in TRACE_syscall.syscall_dropped: seccomp_bpf.c:1394:TRACE_syscall.syscall_dropped:Expected 1 (1) == syscall(207) (18446744073709551615) So it looks like we're returning -1 instead of 1. That's probably a bug in our handling of the return value, or maybe an inconsistency across the arches. I'll try and find time to dig into it. cheers