On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 3:08 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 10:53:47PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > SNIP > > > > > > I think this would mean that this test suite would need to run as > > > > > privileged. Is that Ok? or maybe it'd be better to have a new suite? > > > > > > > > > > > With at least these cases combinations below. Check each of: > > > > > > > > > > > > - not using uretprobe passes > > > > > > - using uretprobe passes (and validates that uretprobe did work) > > > > > > > > > > > > in each of the following conditions: > > > > > > > > > > > > - default-allow filter > > > > > > - default-block filter > > > > > > - filter explicitly blocking __NR_uretprobe and nothing else > > > > > > - filter explicitly allowing __NR_uretprobe (and only other > > > > > > required syscalls) > > > > > > > > > > Ok. > > > > > > > > please let me know if I can help in any way with tests > > > > > > Thanks! Is there a way to partition this work? I'd appreciate the help > > > if we can find some way of doing so. > > > > sure, I'll check the seccomp selftests and let you know > > hi, > if it's any help, feel free to use the code below that creates uretprobe, > it could be bit simpler if we use libbpf, but I think that's not an option Thank you very much! Eyal.
