Re: [PATCH v3] selftests/seccomp: build and pass on arm64

[Kees Cook]

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Shuah Khan <shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/15/2015 12:42 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 7:07 AM, Shuah Khan <shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 10/06/2015 01:30 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>> Changing arm64 syscalls is done via a specific register set, more like s390
>>>> than like arm (specific ptrace call) and x86 (part of general registers).
>>>> Since (restarting) poll doesn't exist on arm64, switch to using nanosleep
>>>> for testing restart_syscall. And since it looks like the syscall ABI is
>>>> inconsistent on arm-compat, so we must work around it (and document it) in
>>>> the test.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> v3:
>>>>  - correctly set syscall number on native arm64.
>>>> v2:
>>>>  - switch to nanosleep from a bad mix of poll and ppoll for testing restart.
>>>> ---
>>>
>>> Is this good to go? Failed to apply to linux-kselftest next.
>>> If you can rebase and resend. I can get this into 4.4-rc1
>>
>> Yes please. :)
>>
>
> ok. Please rebase to linux-kselftest next and resend the patch.

Am I looking at the right tree? linux-kselftest#next doesn't appear to
have the s390 patch that was included in 4.3.

-Kees

>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>
>
> --
> Shuah Khan
> Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
> Open Source Innovation Group
> Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
> shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | (970) 217-8978



-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/