* [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6
@ 2013-07-16 18:07 Eduardo Otubo
2013-07-16 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 1/2] seccomp: no need to check arch in syscall whitelist Eduardo Otubo
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-16 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: qemu-devel; +Cc: pmoore, pbonzini, coreyb
Hello all,
In this small patch series I basically:
v2 update:
- set libseccomp 2.1.0 as requirement on configure script.
- removed setrlimit and added sendfile64 to the whitelist.
1) Remove the ifdef's for the (not so) new libseccomp version that does a
best effort and translates x86_32 syscalls into x86_64 when possible.
2) Remove unused syscalls on the seccomp whitelist. For that removal, I've been
running several instances of Qemu using a script written on top of
virt-test[0]. After some weeks testing I could come up with this small list,
and safely remove them without breaking anything.
[0] - https://github.com/autotest/virt-test/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 1/2] seccomp: no need to check arch in syscall whitelist 2013-07-16 18:07 [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-16 18:07 ` Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-16 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 2/2] seccomp: removing unused syscalls from whitelist Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-18 16:28 ` [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Anthony Liguori 2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-16 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: pmoore, pbonzini, coreyb, Eduardo Otubo v2 update: - set libseccomp 2.1.0 as requirement on configure script. Since libseccomp 2.0 there's no need to check the architecture type anymore. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- configure | 2 +- qemu-seccomp.c | 13 ------------- 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/configure b/configure index cb0f870..89b1fb4 100755 --- a/configure +++ b/configure @@ -1474,7 +1474,7 @@ libs_softmmu="$libs_softmmu -lz" # libseccomp check if test "$seccomp" != "no" ; then - if $pkg_config --atleast-version=1.0.0 libseccomp --modversion >/dev/null 2>&1; then + if $pkg_config --atleast-version=2.1.0 libseccomp --modversion >/dev/null 2>&1; then libs_softmmu="$libs_softmmu `$pkg_config --libs libseccomp`" QEMU_CFLAGS="$QEMU_CFLAGS `$pkg_config --cflags libseccomp`" seccomp="yes" diff --git a/qemu-seccomp.c b/qemu-seccomp.c index ca123bf..1d5fd71 100644 --- a/qemu-seccomp.c +++ b/qemu-seccomp.c @@ -26,12 +26,9 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(timer_gettime), 254 }, { SCMP_SYS(futex), 253 }, { SCMP_SYS(select), 252 }, -#if defined(__x86_64__) { SCMP_SYS(recvfrom), 251 }, { SCMP_SYS(sendto), 250 }, -#elif defined(__i386__) { SCMP_SYS(socketcall), 250 }, -#endif { SCMP_SYS(read), 249 }, { SCMP_SYS(brk), 248 }, { SCMP_SYS(clone), 247 }, @@ -40,7 +37,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(execve), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(open), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(ioctl), 245 }, -#if defined(__x86_64__) { SCMP_SYS(socket), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(setsockopt), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(recvmsg), 245 }, @@ -51,9 +47,7 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(bind), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(listen), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(semget), 245 }, -#elif defined(__i386__) { SCMP_SYS(ipc), 245 }, -#endif { SCMP_SYS(gettimeofday), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(readlink), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(access), 245 }, @@ -64,7 +58,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(statfs), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(unlink), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(wait4), 245 }, -#if defined(__i386__) { SCMP_SYS(fcntl64), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(fstat64), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(stat64), 245 }, @@ -77,7 +70,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(_llseek), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(mmap2), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(sigprocmask), 245 }, -#endif { SCMP_SYS(sched_getparam), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(sched_getscheduler), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(fstat), 245 }, @@ -145,9 +137,7 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(epoll_create), 242 }, { SCMP_SYS(epoll_ctl), 242 }, { SCMP_SYS(epoll_wait), 242 }, -#if defined(__i386__) { SCMP_SYS(waitpid), 242 }, -#elif defined(__x86_64__) { SCMP_SYS(getsockname), 242 }, { SCMP_SYS(getpeername), 242 }, { SCMP_SYS(accept4), 242 }, @@ -159,7 +149,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(semtimedop), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(epoll_ctl_old), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(epoll_wait_old), 241 }, -#endif { SCMP_SYS(epoll_pwait), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(epoll_create1), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(ppoll), 241 }, @@ -174,7 +163,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(getresuid), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(getresgid), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(getgroups), 241 }, -#if defined(__i386__) { SCMP_SYS(getresuid32), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(getresgid32), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(getgroups32), 241 }, @@ -193,7 +181,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(lstat64), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(sendfile64), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(ugetrlimit), 241 }, -#endif { SCMP_SYS(alarm), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(rt_sigsuspend), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(rt_sigqueueinfo), 241 }, -- 1.7.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 2/2] seccomp: removing unused syscalls from whitelist 2013-07-16 18:07 [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-16 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 1/2] seccomp: no need to check arch in syscall whitelist Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-16 18:07 ` Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-18 16:28 ` [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Anthony Liguori 2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-16 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: pmoore, pbonzini, coreyb, Eduardo Otubo Signed-off-by: Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- qemu-seccomp.c | 6 ------ 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/qemu-seccomp.c b/qemu-seccomp.c index 1d5fd71..c44f0d8 100644 --- a/qemu-seccomp.c +++ b/qemu-seccomp.c @@ -108,7 +108,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(lseek), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(pselect6), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(fork), 245 }, - { SCMP_SYS(eventfd), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(rt_sigprocmask), 245 }, { SCMP_SYS(write), 244 }, { SCMP_SYS(fcntl), 243 }, @@ -144,7 +143,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(newfstatat), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(shutdown), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(getsockopt), 241 }, - { SCMP_SYS(semctl), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(semop), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(semtimedop), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(epoll_ctl_old), 241 }, @@ -179,8 +177,6 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(fstatfs64), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(fstatat64), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(lstat64), 241 }, - { SCMP_SYS(sendfile64), 241 }, - { SCMP_SYS(ugetrlimit), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(alarm), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(rt_sigsuspend), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(rt_sigqueueinfo), 241 }, @@ -192,12 +188,10 @@ static const struct QemuSeccompSyscall seccomp_whitelist[] = { { SCMP_SYS(lchown), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(fchownat), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(fstatfs), 241 }, - { SCMP_SYS(sendfile), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(getitimer), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(syncfs), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(fsync), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(fchdir), 241 }, - { SCMP_SYS(flock), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(msync), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(sched_setparam), 241 }, { SCMP_SYS(sched_setscheduler), 241 }, -- 1.7.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-16 18:07 [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-16 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 1/2] seccomp: no need to check arch in syscall whitelist Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-16 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 2/2] seccomp: removing unused syscalls from whitelist Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-18 16:28 ` Anthony Liguori 2013-07-18 16:35 ` Eduardo Otubo 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Anthony Liguori @ 2013-07-18 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eduardo Otubo, qemu-devel; +Cc: pmoore, pbonzini, coreyb Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > Hello all, > > In this small patch series I basically: Cover letter should be marked [PATCH 0/2]. Otherwise it defeats filtering. Would like to see a Reviewed-by from someone before applying this. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > v2 update: > - set libseccomp 2.1.0 as requirement on configure script. > - removed setrlimit and added sendfile64 to the whitelist. > > 1) Remove the ifdef's for the (not so) new libseccomp version that does a > best effort and translates x86_32 syscalls into x86_64 when possible. > > 2) Remove unused syscalls on the seccomp whitelist. For that removal, I've been > running several instances of Qemu using a script written on top of > virt-test[0]. After some weeks testing I could come up with this small list, > and safely remove them without breaking anything. > > [0] - https://github.com/autotest/virt-test/wiki ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-18 16:28 ` [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Anthony Liguori @ 2013-07-18 16:35 ` Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-18 16:37 ` Paolo Bonzini 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-18 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Anthony Liguori; +Cc: pmoore, pbonzini, coreyb, qemu-devel On 07/18/2013 01:28 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > >> Hello all, >> >> In this small patch series I basically: > > Cover letter should be marked [PATCH 0/2]. Otherwise it defeats > filtering. > > Would like to see a Reviewed-by from someone before applying this. I'm running some tests with qemu && xen, I'll post a v3 by the end of the day. I'll format the cover letter in the correct way next time. Thanks, > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >> >> v2 update: >> - set libseccomp 2.1.0 as requirement on configure script. >> - removed setrlimit and added sendfile64 to the whitelist. >> >> 1) Remove the ifdef's for the (not so) new libseccomp version that does a >> best effort and translates x86_32 syscalls into x86_64 when possible. >> >> 2) Remove unused syscalls on the seccomp whitelist. For that removal, I've been >> running several instances of Qemu using a script written on top of >> virt-test[0]. After some weeks testing I could come up with this small list, >> and safely remove them without breaking anything. >> >> [0] - https://github.com/autotest/virt-test/wiki > -- Eduardo Otubo IBM Linux Technology Center ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-18 16:35 ` Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-18 16:37 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-07-18 19:39 ` Paul Moore 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2013-07-18 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eduardo Otubo; +Cc: pmoore, coreyb, qemu-devel, Anthony Liguori Il 18/07/2013 18:35, Eduardo Otubo ha scritto: > > > On 07/18/2013 01:28 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> In this small patch series I basically: >> >> Cover letter should be marked [PATCH 0/2]. Otherwise it defeats >> filtering. >> >> Would like to see a Reviewed-by from someone before applying this. > > I'm running some tests with qemu && xen, I'll post a v3 by the end of > the day. I'll format the cover letter in the correct way next time. I feel that, at some point, grep and code review must trump experiments... Paul, how did you guys handle this in other projects? Paolo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-18 16:37 ` Paolo Bonzini @ 2013-07-18 19:39 ` Paul Moore 2013-07-18 19:48 ` Peter Maydell 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Paul Moore @ 2013-07-18 19:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: coreyb, qemu-devel, Anthony Liguori, Eduardo Otubo On Thursday, July 18, 2013 06:37:15 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 18/07/2013 18:35, Eduardo Otubo ha scritto: > > On 07/18/2013 01:28 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > >>> Hello all, > >> > >>> In this small patch series I basically: > >> Cover letter should be marked [PATCH 0/2]. Otherwise it defeats > >> filtering. > >> > >> Would like to see a Reviewed-by from someone before applying this. > > > > I'm running some tests with qemu && xen, I'll post a v3 by the end of > > the day. I'll format the cover letter in the correct way next time. > > I feel that, at some point, grep and code review must trump experiments... > > Paul, how did you guys handle this in other projects? To the best of my knowledge QEMU currently stands alone with its complexity and use of seccomp filtering. There are other applications, but they are either of the syscall sandboxing type where the users define the filters, or the rigid, smaller, well defined filter type. QEMU is both large and has a huge number of options which affect the syscalls used. At some point it would be nice to develop a mechanism to do some static analysis on a binary and its associated libraries to come up with a worst case filter (worst case because you might not want all the syscalls that a library uses, e.g. glibc). Unfortunately, we don't have such a tool the moment - it's hard enough generating correct filters with a nice architecture agnostic manner :) On the plus side, I think libseccomp is very close to being pretty much feature complete (excluding new architectures that may pop up, at present we are only x86, x86_64, x32, and ARM) so I'll be able to start turning some effort towards better tools and patches for existing applications. -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-18 19:39 ` Paul Moore @ 2013-07-18 19:48 ` Peter Maydell 2013-07-18 20:05 ` Paul Moore 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Peter Maydell @ 2013-07-18 19:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Moore Cc: Paolo Bonzini, coreyb, qemu-devel, Anthony Liguori, Eduardo Otubo On 18 July 2013 20:39, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com> wrote: > On the plus side, I think libseccomp is very close to being pretty much > feature complete (excluding new architectures that may pop up, at present we > are only x86, x86_64, x32, and ARM) ...AArch64 ? :-) -- PMM ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-18 19:48 ` Peter Maydell @ 2013-07-18 20:05 ` Paul Moore 2013-07-18 21:31 ` Peter Maydell 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Paul Moore @ 2013-07-18 20:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Maydell Cc: Paolo Bonzini, coreyb, qemu-devel, Anthony Liguori, Eduardo Otubo On Thursday, July 18, 2013 08:48:10 PM Peter Maydell wrote: > On 18 July 2013 20:39, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com> wrote: > > On the plus side, I think libseccomp is very close to being pretty much > > feature complete (excluding new architectures that may pop up, at present > > we are only x86, x86_64, x32, and ARM) > > ...AArch64 ? :-) > Not yet, just 32-bit ARM EABI. If you've got a working system and are willing to so some hacking or run some tests we could work on it for a future libseccomp release. An emulated AArch64 VM would also work, but that route can be slow/annoying. -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-18 20:05 ` Paul Moore @ 2013-07-18 21:31 ` Peter Maydell 2013-07-18 21:34 ` Paul Moore 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Peter Maydell @ 2013-07-18 21:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Moore Cc: Paolo Bonzini, coreyb, qemu-devel, Anthony Liguori, Eduardo Otubo On 18 July 2013 21:05, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thursday, July 18, 2013 08:48:10 PM Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 18 July 2013 20:39, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com> wrote: >> > On the plus side, I think libseccomp is very close to being pretty much >> > feature complete (excluding new architectures that may pop up, at present >> > we are only x86, x86_64, x32, and ARM) >> >> ...AArch64 ? :-) >> > > Not yet, just 32-bit ARM EABI. > > If you've got a working system and are willing to so some hacking or run some > tests we could work on it for a future libseccomp release. An emulated > AArch64 VM would also work, but that route can be slow/annoying. Simulators are all we have right now (we're juuust getting to the point where hardware is starting to become available). I wasn't being serious really, though I'm sure somebody (possibly even somebody at Red Hat :-)) will work around to it at some point. -- PMM ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-18 21:31 ` Peter Maydell @ 2013-07-18 21:34 ` Paul Moore 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Paul Moore @ 2013-07-18 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Maydell Cc: Paolo Bonzini, coreyb, qemu-devel, Anthony Liguori, Eduardo Otubo On Thursday, July 18, 2013 10:31:46 PM Peter Maydell wrote: > On 18 July 2013 21:05, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, July 18, 2013 08:48:10 PM Peter Maydell wrote: > >> On 18 July 2013 20:39, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > On the plus side, I think libseccomp is very close to being pretty much > >> > feature complete (excluding new architectures that may pop up, at > >> > present > >> > we are only x86, x86_64, x32, and ARM) > >> > >> ...AArch64 ? :-) > > > > Not yet, just 32-bit ARM EABI. > > > > If you've got a working system and are willing to so some hacking or run > > some tests we could work on it for a future libseccomp release. An > > emulated AArch64 VM would also work, but that route can be slow/annoying. > > Simulators are all we have right now (we're juuust getting to the > point where hardware is starting to become available). I wasn't > being serious really, though I'm sure somebody (possibly even > somebody at Red Hat :-)) will work around to it at some point. Regardless, consider it a standing offer. -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 @ 2013-07-15 17:29 Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-15 17:29 ` Eduardo Otubo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-15 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: pmoore, coreyb Hello all, In this small patch series I basically: 1) Remove the ifdef's for the (not so) new libseccomp version that does a best effort and translates x86_32 syscalls into x86_64 when possible. 2) Remove unused syscalls on the seccomp whitelist. For that removal, I've been running several instances of Qemu using a script written on top of virt-test[0]. After some weeks testing I could come up with this small list, and safely remove them without breaking anything. [0] - https://github.com/autotest/virt-test/wiki ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 2013-07-15 17:29 Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-15 17:29 ` Eduardo Otubo 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Eduardo Otubo @ 2013-07-15 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: pmoore, coreyb, Eduardo Otubo Hello all, In this small patch series I basically: 1) Remove the ifdef's for the (not so) new libseccomp version that does a best effort and translates x86_32 syscalls into x86_64 when possible. 2) Remove unused syscalls on the seccomp whitelist. For that removal, I've been running several instances of Qemu using a script written on top of virt-test[0]. After some weeks testing I could come up with this small list, and safely remove them without breaking anything. [0] - https://github.com/autotest/virt-test/wiki GIT: [PATCH 1/2] seccomp: no need to check arch in syscall whitelist GIT: [PATCH 2/2] seccomp: removing unused syscalls gtom whitelist ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-07-18 21:34 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-07-16 18:07 [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-16 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 1/2] seccomp: no need to check arch in syscall whitelist Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-16 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2 2/2] seccomp: removing unused syscalls from whitelist Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-18 16:28 ` [Qemu-devel] seccomp: remove unused syscalls - for 1.6 Anthony Liguori 2013-07-18 16:35 ` Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-18 16:37 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-07-18 19:39 ` Paul Moore 2013-07-18 19:48 ` Peter Maydell 2013-07-18 20:05 ` Paul Moore 2013-07-18 21:31 ` Peter Maydell 2013-07-18 21:34 ` Paul Moore -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2013-07-15 17:29 Eduardo Otubo 2013-07-15 17:29 ` Eduardo Otubo
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.