Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Drop table overrides in x86_syscall_resolve_name() to pseudo syscall … #41

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

xnox
Copy link

@xnox xnox commented Jun 10, 2016

…numbers

A bunch of syscalls got converted from pseudo to real syscall
numbers. And the table now corectly uses pseudo syscall numbers where
needed (e.g. accept, send) thus there is no need to repeat these
overrides in the x86_syscall_resolve_name() which has now got out of
sync with the table.

Fixes #40

Signed-off-by: Dimitri John Ledkov xnox@ubuntu.com

…numbers

A bunch of syscalls got converted from pseudo to real syscall
numbers. And the table now corectly uses pseudo syscall numbers where
needed (e.g. accept, send) thus there is no need to repeat these
overrides in the x86_syscall_resolve_name() which has now got out of
sync with the table.

Fixes seccomp#40

Signed-off-by: Dimitri John Ledkov <xnox@ubuntu.com>
@xnox
Copy link
Author

xnox commented Jun 10, 2016

After this, my tests as pointed out in #40 pass, however, the upstream test-suite now fails with:

Test 30-sim-socket_syscalls%%012-00001 result: FAILURE bpf_sim resulted in ALLOW

@xnox
Copy link
Author

xnox commented Jun 10, 2016

Horum.

30-sim-socket_syscalls  +x86    accept4         0               1               2       N       N       N       KILL

Not sure why it should be a KILL and/or how&why my code change results in this test suite failure, when e.g. "accept" ALLOW/KILL tests remain operating correctly.

@xnox
Copy link
Author

xnox commented Jun 10, 2016

Actually, i"m not sure if this makes sense anymore.

accept4 is 364 on x86 from now on. Thus these two tests are identical, yet expect different results

30-sim-socket_syscalls  +x86    364             0               1               2       N       N       N       ALLOW
30-sim-socket_syscalls  +x86    accept4         0               1               2       N       N       N       KILL

which is not possible....

@xnox
Copy link
Author

xnox commented Jun 10, 2016

actually this is intentional.

@xnox xnox closed this Jun 10, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

strange behaviour on v4.4 kernels with libseccomp v2.3.1
1 participant