From: zhuling <zhuling8@xxxxxxxxxx>
bpf/seccomp: modify hardcode 2 to SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER
while the hardcode 2 has been define in seccomp_bpf.c, we should use
the definitions(SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER) instead of hardcode 2.
Signed-off-by: zhuling <zhuling8@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
samples/bpf/tracex5_user.c | 2 +-
samples/seccomp/dropper.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/samples/bpf/tracex5_user.c b/samples/bpf/tracex5_user.c
index c17d3fb..417753f 100644
--- a/samples/bpf/tracex5_user.c
+++ b/samples/bpf/tracex5_user.c
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ static void install_accept_all_seccomp(void)
.len = (unsigned short)(sizeof(filter)/sizeof(filter[0])),
.filter = filter,
};
- if (prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, 2, &prog))
+ if (prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &prog))
perror("prctl");
}
diff --git a/samples/seccomp/dropper.c b/samples/seccomp/dropper.c
index cc0648e..08f8e7f 100644
--- a/samples/seccomp/dropper.c
+++ b/samples/seccomp/dropper.c
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ static int install_filter(int nr, int arch, int error)
perror("prctl(NO_NEW_PRIVS)");
return 1;
}
- if (prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, 2, &prog)) {
+ if (prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &prog)) {
perror("prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP)");
return 1;
}
--
2.9.5
