On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 6:14 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Should there be a dependency on SECCOMP_ARCH_NATIVE? > Should all architectures that implement seccomp have this? > > E.g. mips does select HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER, but doesn't > have SECCOMP_ARCH_NATIVE? > > (noticed with preliminary out-of-tree seccomp implementation for m68k, > which doesn't have SECCOMP_ARCH_NATIVE Hi Geert You are correct. This specific patch in this series was not applied, and this was addressed in a follow up patch series [1]. MIPS does not define SECCOMP_ARCH_NATIVE because the bitmap expects syscall numbers to start from 0, whereas MIPS does not (defines CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_SYSCALL_NR). The follow up patch makes it so that any arch with HAVE_SPARSE_SYSCALL_NR (currently just MIPS) cannot have CONFIG_SECCOMP_CACHE_DEBUG on, by the depend on clause. I see that you are doing an out of tree seccomp implementation for m68k. Assuming unchanged arch/xtensa/include/asm/syscall.h, something like this to arch/m68k/include/asm/seccomp.h should make it work: #define SECCOMP_ARCH_NATIVE AUDIT_ARCH_M68K #define SECCOMP_ARCH_NATIVE_NR NR_syscalls #define SECCOMP_ARCH_NATIVE_NAME "m68k" If the file does not exist already, arch/xtensa/include/asm/seccomp.h is a good example of how the file should look like, and remember to remove `generic-y += seccomp.h` from arch/m68k/include/asm/Kbuild. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1605101222.git.yifeifz2@xxxxxxxxxxxx/T/ YiFei Zhu _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
