[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABqD9haT5h-7LMkbGSaQbnk8SJj9L21GT61UZCMVWLJCTw9OBg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 14:46:34 -0500
From: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com,
oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, rdunlap@...otime.net,
mcgrathr@...omium.org, tglx@...utronix.de, luto@....edu, eparis@...hat.com,
serge.hallyn@...onical.com, djm@...drot.org, scarybeasts@...il.com,
indan@....nu, pmoore@...hat.com, corbet@....net, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
markus@...omium.org, coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@...omium.org,
jmorris@...ei.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 15/15] Documentation: prctl/seccomp_filter
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:02:00 -0500
> Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> wrote:
>
>> Documents how system call filtering using Berkeley Packet
>> Filter programs works and how it may be used.
>> Includes an example for x86 and a semi-generic
>> example using a macro-based code generator.
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>> +Adding architecture support
>> +-----------------------
>> +
>> +See arch/Kconfig for the authoritative requirements. In general, if an
>> +architecture supports both ptrace_event and seccomp, it will be able to
>> +support seccomp filter with minor fixup: SIGSYS support and seccomp return
>> +value checking. Then it must just add CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER
>> +to its arch-specific Kconfig.
>> diff --git a/samples/Makefile b/samples/Makefile
>> index 2f75851..5ef08bb 100644
>> --- a/samples/Makefile
>> +++ b/samples/Makefile
>
> Oh good, I was going to ask about that.
>
> Can we get this code into tools/testing/selftests? That way people
> will run it more often and it's more likely to be maintained as the
> code evolves.
I'm currently using a lightweight testsuite in addition to the
samples. It's a little more oriented at pass/fail behavior. Would it
be more appropriate to post those in addition to, or instead of,
samples?
thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
