On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 06:21:12PM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> The following sub-tests are failing in seccomp_bpf selftest:
>
> 18:56:54 DEBUG| [stdout] # selftests: seccomp: seccomp_bpf
> ...
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # RUN TRACE_syscall.ptrace.kill_after ...
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # seccomp_bpf.c:2023:kill_after:Expected entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY : PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_EXIT (1) == msg (0)
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # seccomp_bpf.c:2023:kill_after:Expected entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY : PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_EXIT (2) == msg (1)
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # seccomp_bpf.c:2023:kill_after:Expected entry ? PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_ENTRY : PTRACE_EVENTMSG_SYSCALL_EXIT (1) == msg (2)
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # kill_after: Test exited normally instead of by signal (code: 12)
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # FAIL TRACE_syscall.ptrace.kill_after
> ...
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # RUN TRACE_syscall.seccomp.kill_after ...
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # seccomp_bpf.c:1547:kill_after:Expected !ptrace_syscall (1) == IS_SECCOMP_EVENT(status) (0)
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # kill_after: Test exited normally instead of by signal (code: 0)
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # FAIL TRACE_syscall.seccomp.kill_after
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # not ok 80 TRACE_syscall.seccomp.kill_after
> ...
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # FAILED: 85 / 87 tests passed.
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] # # Totals: pass:85 fail:2 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
> 18:56:57 DEBUG| [stdout] not ok 1 selftests: seccomp: seccomp_bpf # exit=1
>
> I did some bisecting and found that the failures started to happen with:
>
> 307d522f5eb8 ("signal/seccomp: Refactor seccomp signal and coredump generation")
>
> Not sure if the test needs to be fixed after this commit, or if the
> commit is actually introducing an issue. I'll investigate more, unless
> someone knows already what's going on.
Ah thanks for noticing; I will investigate...
--
Kees Cook
