From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C7CEC41604 for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 19:45:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2DA9206CA for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 19:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="G6cAASsL" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728237AbgIUTpv (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Sep 2020 15:45:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33918 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727244AbgIUTpv (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Sep 2020 15:45:51 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe42.google.com (mail-vs1-xe42.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e42]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9A18C0613CF for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:45:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe42.google.com with SMTP id p24so3894569vsf.8 for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:45:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iX2ZpXGFbNOu72F3q0KCqB8Y6bryK806FhnLUU2NMuk=; b=G6cAASsLIdBm7YhTBRLehSgS93d9xmCipqJcPtsYE6zI1r6uEQj8RuaqNhWKZm/MSh Djat2TbJzt5UKA0QvncwguQxKKMQ0agt0viVUQccQZn3EoyHE8g3ghfJQ6ywAlHnw+pO 9qE+79PTCaUVi5hgMhQ7X7Bcox4VRzKIvSVhlwYN71gQ0OiTEIB5blID6x01UPtNGizf /P1XFDtVCB64JvdhHKuf6XRASxc7PgDU4lyqZ5eV5J8ZesE/8EGHZPFWXBr4ZGEiRTub S8y0kVvYfyfgyzL1MZ2Y1nQgr2Rap3Fk9D6NqiPPrieY3VqTUoskxJmiQES1ROkyc2bi HcNw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iX2ZpXGFbNOu72F3q0KCqB8Y6bryK806FhnLUU2NMuk=; b=avvx5uC2B+2Pb1JjEGtVztOV0mg9OejtvjXCUSb7DQzj5k4TIw/+709mWr1dYszWt0 lwWMYmgVzVMa95ta4MEPLUJ/BZG5Z8Xc2xh2VNY1vV7ajmSr4ypIXxUEqbDnij8WwVEt 4Qi4gd1vnwe5dKuW5h29maYdTpXPDImrVsVY2ElgNc2IIRS+91ckBgFie0yPLCf0jEh3 rum+lf2N7he2vx65TyPHAfdgV8pt6Hprq8P3szfXuLDMHv9KUbGYlElOfrn4PtvfGvx/ m23XpqcdftKmpIPzB06KaNII3rlaW48JIZ20Wb2ruR2eqCESGaZ6QeRACScDWuyCwhCE WN9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533LBh385r7xF3Eb6OBSV/kFla2Z9BHvP3bt0AplIyRXCA8bj9J3 5lyQLqp9LO6wQ7o0bdnZkNMulV63AKVTY0PA3d/1VA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxviktg8cUUe2JlqcrROxU1giGTaebOLk7jJ1ACqAQWlM2uhqXSKmHI3mvsQiPKOfbpu4LWXtjhBeGIsQSOogU= X-Received: by 2002:a67:e991:: with SMTP id b17mr1266363vso.16.1600717549823; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:45:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Jann Horn Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 21:45:23 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH seccomp 0/2] seccomp: Add bitmap cache of arg-independent filter results that allow syscalls To: Hubertus Franke Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , bpf , Linux Containers , Aleksa Sarai , Dimitrios Skarlatos , Giuseppe Scrivano , Jack Chen , Kees Cook , kernel list , Andy Lutomirski , Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum , Josep Torrellas , Tianyin Xu , Valentin Rothberg , Will Drewry , YiFei Zhu , YiFei Zhu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:35 PM Hubertus Franke wrote: > I suggest we first bring it down to the minimal features we what and successively build the functions as these ideas evolve. > We asked YiFei to prepare a minimal set that brings home the basic features. Might not be 100% optimal but having the hooks, the basic cache in place and getting a good benefit should be a good starting point > to get this integrated into a linux kernel and then enable a larger experimentation. > Does that make sense to approach it from that point ? Sure. As I said, I don't think that the procfs part is a blocker - if YiFei doesn't want to implement it now, I don't think it's necessary. (But it would make it possible to write more precise tests.) By the way: Please don't top-post on mailing lists - instead, quote specific parts of a message and reply below those quotes. Also, don't send HTML mail to kernel mailing lists, because they will reject it.