seccomp
RFE: Add support for SPARC
This PR adds support for both 32-bit and 64-bit SPARC.
SPARC is one of the two remaining architectures, the other one being Alpha, that is currently not supported by libseccomp. As the kernel already supports SECCOMP on SPARC, we just have to add support to libseccomp.
coverage: 88.97% (-0.08%) from 89.046% when pulling 51a837accc334a6fb9124cc5b83cf8eef6c31c24 on glaubitz:sparc-support into 9b9ea8e7a173b96e59fb21e8d461365110e7b4ef on seccomp:main.
The sparc patch looks reasonable at a quick glance. I'll try to dig up a sparc machine so that I can test it out :)
On Aug 29, 2025, at 9:45 PM, Tom Hromatka @.> wrote:drakenclimber left a comment (seccomp/libseccomp#471) The sparc patch looks reasonable at a quick glance. I'll try to dig up a sparc machine so that I can test it out :)Message ID: @.>
Thanks!There is gcc202 in the GCC Compile Farm which is currently offline but should be back online next week after hardware maintenance.
There is gcc202 in the GCC Compile Farm which is currently offline but should be back online next week after hardware maintenance.
I found a Sparc box here within Oracle (not a surprise), but I need to put a newer Linux on it. I expect that to happen next week.
If my box doesn't work out, I'll try out the gcc box.
There is gcc202 in the GCC Compile Farm which is currently offline but should be back online next week after hardware maintenance.
I found a Sparc box here within Oracle (not a surprise), but I need to put a newer Linux on it. I expect that to happen next week.
Ah, nice. Great that this is still possible ;-).
If my box doesn't work out, I'll try out the gcc box.
The GCC porterbox is expected to return to service tomorrow (crossing fingers).
I have my sparc64 box up and running.
$ lscpu
Architecture: sparc64
CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order: Big Endian
CPU(s): 256
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-255
Model name: SPARC-M7
Thread(s) per core: 8
Core(s) per socket: 32
Socket(s): 1
Flags: sun4v
Caches (sum of all):
L1d: 4 MiB (256 instances)
L1i: 4 MiB (256 instances)
L2: 64 MiB (256 instances)
I'm getting test failures on test 36 and 37 with this patchset. I'll try and look into it later this week.
$ ./regression -b 36-sim-ipc_syscalls
=============== Mon Sep 8 10:28:33 AM EDT 2025 ===============
Regression Test Report ("regression -b 36-sim-ipc_syscalls")
batch name: 36-sim-ipc_syscalls
test mode: c
test type: bpf-sim
test arch: x86
Test 36-sim-ipc_syscalls%%001-00001 result: ERROR 36-sim-ipc_syscalls rc=33
...
$ ./regression -b 37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be
=============== Mon Sep 8 10:29:40 AM EDT 2025 ===============
Regression Test Report ("regression -b 37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be")
batch name: 37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be
test mode: c
test type: bpf-sim
test arch: s390
Test 37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be%%001-00001 result: ERROR 37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be rc=14
...
Thanks a lot! We're having delays with our SPARC T5, so I'm glad you got a machine yourself.
FWIW, I think the Linux kernel on SPARC might need some additional fixes for seccomp. I'm looking into that as well.
I found the bug that was causing tests 36 and 37 to fail. Definitely not what I expected :).
Here's the fix for those test failures:
diff --git a/src/syscalls.h b/src/syscalls.h
index b2720fc..ccdff1b 100644
--- a/src/syscalls.h
+++ b/src/syscalls.h
@@ -43,6 +43,9 @@ struct arch_syscall_table {
/* each arch listed here must be defined in syscalls.c */
/* NOTE: see the warning above - BEWARE! */
+ /* NOTE: the order of the members of this structure must exactly
+ * match the order of the columns in syscalls.csv! */
+
int x86;
enum scmp_kver x86_kver;
int x86_64;
@@ -86,13 +89,13 @@ struct arch_syscall_table {
int s390x;
enum scmp_kver s390x_kver;
+ int sh;
+ enum scmp_kver sh_kver;
+
int sparc;
enum scmp_kver sparc_kver;
int sparc64;
enum scmp_kver sparc64_kver;
-
- int sh;
- enum scmp_kver sh_kver;
};
For completeness, I'd recommend adding sparc and sparc64 to test 37:
diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c
index d1bd57e..118c4a8 100644
--- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c
+++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c
@@ -51,6 +51,12 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (rc != 0)
goto out;
rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_PPC);
+ if (rc != 0)
+ goto out;
+ rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC);
+ if (rc != 0)
+ goto out;
+ rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC64);
if (rc != 0)
goto out;
diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests
index 96a5c81..b9224e4 100644
--- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests
+++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests
@@ -7,19 +7,19 @@
test type: bpf-sim
-# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2 Arg3 Arg4
Arg5 Result
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 1 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 2 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 3 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 4 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 11 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 12 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 13 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 14 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 21 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 22 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 23 N N N N
N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 24 N N N N
N ALLOW
+# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2
Arg3 Arg4 Arg5 Result
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 1 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 2 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 3 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 4 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 11 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 12 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 13 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 14 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 21 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 22 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 23 N N
N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 24 N N
N N N ALLOW
test type: bpf-valgrind
FWIW, I think the Linux kernel on SPARC might need some additional fixes for seccomp. I'm looking into that as well.
I agree. Test 52 is a test that loads a really simple seccomp filter in the kernel. It's failing in the seccomp() syscall.
$ ./regression -b 52-basic-load
=============== Tue Sep 9 06:06:17 AM EDT 2025 ===============
Regression Test Report ("regression -b 52-basic-load")
batch name: 52-basic-load
test mode: c
test type: basic
Test 52-basic-load%%001-00001 result: FAILURE 52-basic-load rc=127
Regression Test Summary
tests run: 1
tests skipped: 0
tests passed: 0
tests failed: 1
tests errored: 0
============================================================
I found the bug that was causing tests 36 and 37 to fail. Definitely not what I expected :).
Here's the fix for those test failures:
diff --git a/src/syscalls.h b/src/syscalls.h index b2720fc..ccdff1b 100644 --- a/src/syscalls.h +++ b/src/syscalls.h @@ -43,6 +43,9 @@ struct arch_syscall_table { /* each arch listed here must be defined in syscalls.c */ /* NOTE: see the warning above - BEWARE! */ + /* NOTE: the order of the members of this structure must exactly + * match the order of the columns in syscalls.csv! */ + int x86; enum scmp_kver x86_kver; int x86_64; @@ -86,13 +89,13 @@ struct arch_syscall_table { int s390x; enum scmp_kver s390x_kver; + int sh; + enum scmp_kver sh_kver; + int sparc; enum scmp_kver sparc_kver; int sparc64; enum scmp_kver sparc64_kver; - - int sh; - enum scmp_kver sh_kver; };
Oh, wow. I would have never guessed that. I will fix that. Thanks so much for the thorough review!
For completeness, I'd recommend adding sparc and sparc64 to test 37:
diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c index d1bd57e..118c4a8 100644 --- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c +++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c @@ -51,6 +51,12 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) if (rc != 0) goto out; rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_PPC); + if (rc != 0) + goto out; + rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC); + if (rc != 0) + goto out; + rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC64); if (rc != 0) goto out; diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests index 96a5c81..b9224e4 100644 --- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests +++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests @@ -7,19 +7,19 @@ test type: bpf-sim -# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2 Arg3 Arg4 Arg5 Result -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 1 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 2 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 3 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 4 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 11 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 12 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 13 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 14 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 21 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 22 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 23 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 24 N N N N N ALLOW +# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2 Arg3 Arg4 Arg5 Result +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 1 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 2 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 3 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 4 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 11 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 12 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 13 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 14 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 21 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 22 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 23 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 24 N N N N N ALLOW test type: bpf-valgrind
Do I just have to modify tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c or also tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests?
Do I just have to modify
tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.cor alsotests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests?
We'll need to modify tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c, tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py (which I forgot to add), and tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests. Here's the entire diff:
diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c
index d1bd57e..118c4a8 100644
--- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c
+++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c
@@ -51,6 +51,12 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (rc != 0)
goto out;
rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_PPC);
+ if (rc != 0)
+ goto out;
+ rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC);
+ if (rc != 0)
+ goto out;
+ rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC64);
if (rc != 0)
goto out;
diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py
index 18a09d0..34b0201 100755
--- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py
+++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py
@@ -34,6 +34,8 @@ def test(args):
f.add_arch(Arch("s390"))
f.add_arch(Arch("s390x"))
f.add_arch(Arch("ppc"))
+ f.add_arch(Arch("sparc"))
+ f.add_arch(Arch("sparc64"))
f.add_rule(ALLOW, "semop")
f.add_rule(ALLOW, "semtimedop")
f.add_rule(ALLOW, "semget")
diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests
index 96a5c81..b9224e4 100644
--- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests
+++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests
@@ -7,19 +7,19 @@
test type: bpf-sim
-# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2 Arg3 Arg4 Arg5 Result
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 1 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 2 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 3 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 4 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 11 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 12 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 13 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 14 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 21 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 22 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 23 N N N N N ALLOW
-37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 24 N N N N N ALLOW
+# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2 Arg3 Arg4 Arg5 Result
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 1 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 2 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 3 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 4 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 11 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 12 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 13 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 14 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 21 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 22 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 23 N N N N N ALLOW
+37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 24 N N N N N ALLOW
test type: bpf-valgrind
Do I just have to modify
tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.cor alsotests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests?We'll need to modify
tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c,tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py(which I forgot to add), andtests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests. Here's the entire diff:diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c index d1bd57e..118c4a8 100644 --- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c +++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.c @@ -51,6 +51,12 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) if (rc != 0) goto out; rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_PPC); + if (rc != 0) + goto out; + rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC); + if (rc != 0) + goto out; + rc = seccomp_arch_add(ctx, SCMP_ARCH_SPARC64); if (rc != 0) goto out; diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py index 18a09d0..34b0201 100755 --- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py +++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.py @@ -34,6 +34,8 @@ def test(args): f.add_arch(Arch("s390")) f.add_arch(Arch("s390x")) f.add_arch(Arch("ppc")) + f.add_arch(Arch("sparc")) + f.add_arch(Arch("sparc64")) f.add_rule(ALLOW, "semop") f.add_rule(ALLOW, "semtimedop") f.add_rule(ALLOW, "semget") diff --git a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests index 96a5c81..b9224e4 100644 --- a/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests +++ b/tests/37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be.tests @@ -7,19 +7,19 @@ test type: bpf-sim -# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2 Arg3 Arg4 Arg5 Result -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 1 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 2 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 3 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 4 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 11 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 12 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 13 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 14 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 21 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 22 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 23 N N N N N ALLOW -37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc ipc 24 N N N N N ALLOW +# Testname Arch Syscall Arg0 Arg1 Arg2 Arg3 Arg4 Arg5 Result +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 1 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 2 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 3 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 4 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 11 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 12 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 13 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 14 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 21 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 22 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 23 N N N N N ALLOW +37-sim-ipc_syscalls_be +s390,+s390x,+ppc,+sparc,+sparc64 ipc 24 N N N N N ALLOW test type: bpf-valgrind
Thank you so much!
Unfortunately I wasn't able to successfully run the python tests. Either I screwed something up, or there are problems with the Python/Debian/Pip repos. I'm guessing the former :)
I'm going to retest on Debian unstable sparc64 later this week.
I'm still seeing a failure with test 52 (which loads the filter into the kernel). Seems like an issue with the sparc/seccomp kernel itself. I'll gladly help test/review kernel changes to get this working.
We're currently working on fixing many issues in the Linux kernel running on SPARC. Oracle engineers actually made a lot of contributions here, but they stopped upstreaming these changes when they abandoned the project.
The patches are part of the UEK 4/Update 7 kernel.
All in all, this looks good to me. I had a few small nitpicks, but they're easily fixed.
I think I'd prefer to wait to merge it until we get it fully working, but I'll defer to others here. Once we get it running, I'll add my
Reviewed-by.
Sure, no problem.
Thanks for the hard work, @glaubitz. It's always cool to see another architecture added :)
Once SPARC support has been merged, Alpha will be the last unsupported platform and I'm sure we'll get that eventually added as well. ;-)
I found the bug that was causing tests 36 and 37 to fail. Definitely not what I expected :). Here's the fix for those test failures:
diff --git a/src/syscalls.h b/src/syscalls.h index b2720fc..ccdff1b 100644 --- a/src/syscalls.h +++ b/src/syscalls.h @@ -43,6 +43,9 @@ struct arch_syscall_table { /* each arch listed here must be defined in syscalls.c */ /* NOTE: see the warning above - BEWARE! */ + /* NOTE: the order of the members of this structure must exactly + * match the order of the columns in syscalls.csv! */ + int x86; enum scmp_kver x86_kver; int x86_64; @@ -86,13 +89,13 @@ struct arch_syscall_table { int s390x; enum scmp_kver s390x_kver; + int sh; + enum scmp_kver sh_kver; + int sparc; enum scmp_kver sparc_kver; int sparc64; enum scmp_kver sparc64_kver; - - int sh; - enum scmp_kver sh_kver; };Oh, wow. I would have never guessed that. I will fix that. Thanks so much for the thorough review!
Yeah ... oops! Does anyone want to submit a separate PR to fix that?
Oh, wow. I would have never guessed that. I will fix that. Thanks so much for the thorough review!
Yeah ... oops! Does anyone want to submit a separate PR to fix that?
What issue exactly do you mean?
And I just realized you requested some additional changes. I will look into these in the weekend.
FWIW, there is a Debian unstable machine running on a SPARC T5 LDOM in the GCC Compile Farm now available for testing (cfarm202.cfarm.net).
I will ask for help to implement SECCOMP_FILTER on SPARC, I have filed an issue for it already.
What issue exactly do you mean?
My apologies, I thought the sh arch/ABI was located incorrectly in the arch_syscall_table struct in the current codebase, but I realize it was just an issue with the code in the PR. Sorry for the noise :)