From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tycho Andersen Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] seccomp.2: document userspace notification Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 08:19:37 -0700 Message-ID: <20190301151937.GE7413@cisco> References: <20181213001106.15268-1-tycho@tycho.ws> <20181213001106.15268-3-tycho@tycho.ws> <2cea5fec-e73e-5749-18af-15c35a4bd23c@gmail.com> <20190301145310.GC7413@cisco> <052d73e2-c786-a760-f03a-a07b5772de5a@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <052d73e2-c786-a760-f03a-a07b5772de5a@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook , Linux API , lkml , Andy Lutomirski , Jann Horn , Oleg Nesterov , Christian Brauner , "Eric W. Biederman" , Containers , Aleksa Sarai , Tyler Hicks , Akihiro Suda List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:16:27PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > Hello Tycho, > > On 3/1/19 3:53 PM, Tycho Andersen wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 01:52:19PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >>> +a notification will be sent to this fd. See "Userspace Notification" below for > >> > >> s/fd/file descriptor/ throughout please. > > > > Will do. > > > >>> +more details. > >> > >> I think the description here could be better worded as something like: > >> > >> SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER > >> Register a new filter, as usual, but on success return a > >> new file descriptor that provides user-space notifications. > >> When the filter returns SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF, a notification > >> will be provided via this file descriptor. The close-on-exec > >> flag is automatically set on the new file descriptor. ... > >> > >>> .RE > >>> .TP > >>> .BR SECCOMP_GET_ACTION_AVAIL " (since Linux 4.14)" > >>> @@ -606,6 +613,17 @@ file. > >>> .TP > >>> .BR SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW > >>> This value results in the system call being executed. > >>> +.TP > >>> +.BR SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF " (since Linux 4.21)" > >> > >> Please see the start of this hanging list in the manual page. > >> Can you confirm that SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF really is the lowest > >> in the precedence order of all of the filter return values? > > > > Oh, no, I didn't realize it was in a particular order. I'll switch it. > > Just for my immediate education (I'm experimenting right now), > where/how does it fit in the precedence order? In between RET_ERRNO and RET_TRACE; see include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h for details. Tycho