Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-17 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 1:12 AM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/16/2017 04:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >>> On 08/16/2017 03:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote: On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/16/2017 09:57 AM, Paul

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-16 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/16/2017 04:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> On 08/16/2017 03:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: On 08/16/2017 09:57 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Tyler Hicks

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-16 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/16/2017 03:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >>> On 08/16/2017 09:57 AM, Paul Moore wrote: On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/15/2017 04:14 PM, Paul Moore

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-16 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/16/2017 03:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> On 08/16/2017 09:57 AM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: On 08/15/2017 04:14 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Tyler Hicks

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-16 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/16/2017 09:57 AM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >>> On 08/15/2017 04:14 PM, Paul Moore wrote: On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/14/2017 04:04 PM, Paul Moore

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-16 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/16/2017 09:57 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> On 08/15/2017 04:14 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: On 08/14/2017 04:04 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > First, I think some clarification is in order.

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-16 Thread Paul Moore
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/15/2017 04:14 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >>> On 08/14/2017 04:04 PM, Paul Moore wrote: First, I think some clarification is in order. The only tests that are executed using the

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-15 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/15/2017 04:14 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> On 08/14/2017 04:04 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> First, I think some clarification is in order. The only tests that >>> are executed using the host kernel's seccomp mechanism are the >>> tests/*-live-*

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-15 Thread Paul Moore
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/14/2017 04:04 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> First, I think some clarification is in order. The only tests that >> are executed using the host kernel's seccomp mechanism are the >> tests/*-live-* tests. All of the tests/*-sim-* tests, which a

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-14 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/14/2017 04:04 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> On 08/14/2017 03:53 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: I had forgotten about an aspect of this problem. We'll want to test new return actions in

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-14 Thread Paul Moore
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/14/2017 03:53 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >>> I had forgotten about an aspect of this problem. We'll want to test new >>> return actions in the simulated BPF tests but it won't be possible

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-14 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/14/2017 03:53 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> I had forgotten about an aspect of this problem. We'll want to test new >> return actions in the simulated BPF tests but it won't be possible >> because the seccomp(2) syscall will return ENOSYS unde

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-14 Thread Paul Moore
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > I had forgotten about an aspect of this problem. We'll want to test new > return actions in the simulated BPF tests but it won't be possible > because the seccomp(2) syscall will return ENOSYS under valgrind (under > both old and new kernels).

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-11 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/10/2017 03:02 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> On 08/10/2017 01:56 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: Hello - I'm working on some libseccomp patches to support new kernel filter flags (SECCOMP

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-10 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 08/10/2017 01:56 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >>> Hello - I'm working on some libseccomp patches to support new kernel >>> filter flags (SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_LOG and maybe >>> SECCOMP_FILTER_FL

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-10 Thread Tyler Hicks
On 08/10/2017 01:56 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: >> Hello - I'm working on some libseccomp patches to support new kernel >> filter flags (SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_LOG and maybe >> SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS) and return actions (SECCOMP_RET_LOG) >> be

Re: [libseccomp] Preferred way of telling libseccomp that it is being tested

2017-08-10 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > Hello - I'm working on some libseccomp patches to support new kernel > filter flags (SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_LOG and maybe > SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS) and return actions (SECCOMP_RET_LOG) > being discussed upstream. I've bumped into an issu