From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35788) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZAGo5-0004ur-U1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 08:08:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZAGo0-0007qc-L6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 08:08:01 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33366) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZAGo0-0007q6-G7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 08:07:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 14:07:49 +0200 From: Andrew Jones Message-ID: <20150701120749.GA2940@hawk.localdomain> References: <1428670681-23032-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <2877592.aNXnatIRsp@sifl> <1691300.PcMPTG641q@sifl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1691300.PcMPTG641q@sifl> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.3] Revert seccomp tests that allow it to be used on non-x86 architectures List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Moore Cc: Peter Maydell , Marcus Meissner , Karl-Philipp Richter , Patch Tracking , Riku Voipio , Alexander Graf , QEMU Developers , Eduardo Otubo , Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 01:18:49PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 06:07:40 PM Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 30 June 2015 at 18:01, Paul Moore wrote: > > > I'm starting to wonder if the 32-bit ARM build system didn't have > > > __NR_cacheflush defined in the system headers; that might explain some of > > > the behavior. Could you check your system to see if it has > > > __NR_cacheflush defined (try /usr/include/asm/unistd.h)? > > > > The constant name is __ARM_NR_cacheflush, not __NR_cacheflush > > (all the ARM-specific syscalls are __ARM_NR_*). See > > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h#L418 > > /me smacks his forehead > > Of course it is. We already work around that in arch-syscall-validate. D'oh! > > Good news though, I think we just found the bug ;) > > I'm currently trying to put out another fire in a different project; as soon > as I've got that done I'll fix this. However, if somebody wants to play, I'm > always happy to accept patches :) Sent: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/libseccomp/RD9RTmc2Lxo I'll send the patch for qemu to add cacheflush to the whitelist shortly. drew > > -- > paul moore > security @ redhat > > >