Hi Kees, I was looking further at the seccomp(2) man page we put togetehr a while ago, and in particular at the example [1]. I realized that from a readability view, the order of the statements is rather contorted, so that we have branches to the end of the code (labels 5 and 6) to handle the syscall and arch mismatch cases, rather than swapping the branch order on the statements labeled 0 and 1, and having the kill statements immediately follow the test statements. However, I presume the ordering is as it is for efficiency reasons, so that the common case involves no branch forward (i.e., a branch offset of 0). Is that the case? If so, probably something should be said in the man page. Cheers, Michael [1] http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/seccomp.2.html#EXAMPLE -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
