https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=345414

Mark Wielaard <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           See Also|                            |https://bugzilla.redhat.com
                   |                            |/show_bug.cgi?id=1800495
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
            Summary|I get the following when I  |Missing seccomp support
                   |ran valgrind  WARNING:      |(WARNING: unhandled
                   |unhandled syscall: 317      |syscall: 317)
                 CC|                            |[email protected]
             Status|REPORTED                    |CONFIRMED

--- Comment #9 from Mark Wielaard <[email protected]> ---
There are more applications using seccomp now to create a kind of sandbox. e.g.
qemu does (when using -sandbox=on).

seccomp is a little tricky for valgrind to implement since valgrind itself
might use system calls not used by the application running under valgrind since
they are the same process. And the arguments are also tricky to interpret since
depending on operation and flags this might be an arbitrary BPF program.

We could simply return ENOSYS for seccomp and not produce the error/warning
message.

Or we could do some simple argument checks and pass it through as is to the
kernel. That might then break valgrind if the seccomp call blocks some syscall
we need, but things are already broken anyway.

Or we could have a new command line flag --allow-seccomp that switches between
the two modes of operation?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

Reply via email to