From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759926AbaGYIw3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2014 04:52:29 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f50.google.com ([209.85.220.50]:37183 "EHLO mail-pa0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751961AbaGYIw0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2014 04:52:26 -0400 Message-ID: <53D21AC1.8050805@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 17:52:17 +0900 From: AKASHI Takahiro User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andy Lutomirski CC: Deepak Saxena , Catalin Marinas , linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, LKML , Will Deacon , Will Drewry , Kees Cook , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] asm-generic: Add generic seccomp.h for secure computing mode 1 References: <1406020499-5537-1-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <1406020499-5537-3-git-send-email-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> <53D0802A.7070703@amacapital.net> <53D096D0.2000708@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/24/2014 11:57 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Jul 23, 2014 10:17 PM, "AKASHI Takahiro" wrote: >> >> On 07/24/2014 01:41 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>>> >>>> On 07/22/2014 02:14 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Those values (__NR_seccomp_*) are used solely in secure_computing() >>>>> to identify mode 1 system calls. If compat system calls have different >>>>> syscall numbers, asm/seccomp.h may override them. >>>>> >>>>> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann >>>>> Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro >>>>> --- >>>>> include/asm-generic/seccomp.h | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 include/asm-generic/seccomp.h >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/seccomp.h b/include/asm-generic/seccomp.h >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 0000000..5e97022 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/include/asm-generic/seccomp.h >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ >>>>> +/* >>>>> + * include/asm-generic/seccomp.h >>>>> + * >>>>> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Linaro Limited >>>>> + * Author: AKASHI Takahiro >>>>> + * >>>>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify >>>>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as >>>>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation. >>>>> + */ >>>>> +#ifndef _ASM_GENERIC_SECCOMP_H >>>>> +#define _ASM_GENERIC_SECCOMP_H >>>>> + >>>>> +#include >>>>> + >>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_COMPAT) && !defined(__NR_seccomp_read_32) >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_read_32 __NR_read >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_write_32 __NR_write >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_exit_32 __NR_exit >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_sigreturn_32 __NR_rt_sigreturn >>>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_COMPAT && ! already defined */ >>>>> + >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_read __NR_read >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_write __NR_write >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_exit __NR_exit >>>>> +#define __NR_seccomp_sigreturn __NR_rt_sigreturn >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't like these names. __NR_seccomp_read sounds like the number of a >>>> syscall called seccomp_read. >>>> >>>> Also, shouldn't something be including this header? I'm confused. >>> >>> >>> Ah! Good catch. These names are correct (see kernel/seccomp.c's >>> mode1_syscalls and mode1_syscalls_32 arrays), but the location of this >>> change was unexpected. I was expecting this file to live in >>> arch/*/include/asm/seccomp.h, not in include/asm-generic/seccomp.h. >>> >>> However, since it's always the same list, it might make sense to >>> consolidate them into a single place as a default to make arch porting >>> easier. >> >> >> Yeah, that is why I put this file under include/asm-generic. > > It seems odd that the header would be added without any users. I > guess it's okay, since arm64 uses it in the followup patch. > >> >>> However, I think that should be a separate patch. >> >> >> Do you mean that the code for all the existing archs should also be changed >> to use this (common) header? > > If that works, yes. As is often the case, the patch itself is quite simple, but I can't test it on other architectures. -Takahiro AKASHI > --Andy > >> >> -Takahiro AKASHI >>> >>> >>> -Kees >>>