On 2026-09-02 09:27, Stian Halseth wrote:
> This adds SECCOMP_FILTER support for sparc64.
> 
> The arch prerequisites have been in place for years, so patch 1 is
> mostly about the missing piece: letting seccomp veto a syscall, and
> returning to user space with the return value the seccomp core set in
> pt_regs rather than the -ENOSYS the assembler stubs used to force on
> any denied syscall.  Patch 2 teaches the seccomp_bpf selftest to
> drive sparc64's registers.
> 
> Tested on an UltraSPARC T4-1 (sun4v):
> 
>   - tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf: 95 passed, 0 failed,
>     16 skipped (uprobes and other optional features)
>   - libseccomp with its pending SPARC support (libseccomp PR #471)
>     passes its full suite, 5190 of 5190, including the live tests
>     that require kernel SECCOMP_FILTER
>   - docker containers run confined by the default profile, and a
>     custom SCMP_ACT_ERRNO profile denies as expected
> 
> The libseccomp side is https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/pull/471,
> and the tracking issue is https://github.com/sparclinux/issues/issues/11.
> 
> v2: drop the local regs-struct definition in the selftest in favour of
>     PTRACE_GETREGS64/PTRACE_SETREGS64 and the uapi struct pt_regs
>     (Kees Cook); patch 1 unchanged.
> 
> Stian Halseth (2):
>   sparc64: add seccomp filter support
>   selftests/seccomp: add sparc64 support
> 
>  arch/sparc/Kconfig                            |  2 +-
>  arch/sparc/include/asm/seccomp.h              | 15 ++++++++
>  arch/sparc/include/asm/syscall.h              | 11 +++---
>  arch/sparc/kernel/entry.h                     |  2 +-
>  arch/sparc/kernel/ptrace_64.c                 | 28 ++++++++++-----
>  arch/sparc/kernel/syscalls.S                  | 28 +++++++++++----
>  tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  7 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> 

Looks good to me, and selftests runs fine for me as well. Thanks! We have a soon
incoming patch set adding support for sparc32 as well on top of this.

Kees, are you ok with the selftest changes being taken through my tree?

Cheers,
Andreas


Reply via email to