On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 08:28:45PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:35:28PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > Hi Rich!
> >
> > On 9/10/20 3:37 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> > >> Which I reported to Rich on the 2nd and he had me test a one line patch
> > >> fixing
> >
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:35:28PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Rich!
>
> On 9/10/20 3:37 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> >> Which I reported to Rich on the 2nd and he had me test a one line patch
> >> fixing
> >> it (adding an extra #include) on the 3rd, but I just did a fresh pull and
Hi Rich!
On 9/10/20 3:37 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> Which I reported to Rich on the 2nd and he had me test a one line patch
>> fixing
>> it (adding an extra #include) on the 3rd, but I just did a fresh pull and the
>> j2_defconfig build still broke a week later.
>
> Yes, that's presently the
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 06:02:05AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On 9/10/20 4:55 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > Hi Rich!
> >
> > On 9/7/20 7:44 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> >>> Can we still get this merged as a hotfix for 5.9?
> >>
> >> Yes, fixes for regressions in the same release cycle are
On 9/10/20 4:55 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Rich!
>
> On 9/7/20 7:44 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>>> Can we still get this merged as a hotfix for 5.9?
>>
>> Yes, fixes for regressions in the same release cycle are in-scope (the
>> whole point of having -rc's). I have at least one other
Hi Rich!
On 9/7/20 7:44 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> Can we still get this merged as a hotfix for 5.9?
>
> Yes, fixes for regressions in the same release cycle are in-scope (the
> whole point of having -rc's). I have at least one other fix that needs
> to go in too and was just giving it a little
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 11:52:20AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Rich!
>
> On 9/3/20 6:16 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> >> I can confirm that this patch fixes both strace for me and does not break
> >> libseccomp,
> >> I have run the libseccomp testsuite with my patch for SuperH
Hi Rich!
On 9/3/20 6:16 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> I can confirm that this patch fixes both strace for me and does not break
>> libseccomp,
>> I have run the libseccomp testsuite with my patch for SuperH support applied
>> on top
>> of a rebased libseccomp with the 32-bit fixes. Attaching the
On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 12:14:43PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Rich!
>
> On 9/3/20 7:48 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
> > Addition of SECCOMP_FILTER exposed a longstanding bug in
> > do_syscall_trace_enter, whereby r0 (the 5th argument register) was
> > mistakenly used where r3
Hi Rich!
On 9/3/20 7:48 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
> Addition of SECCOMP_FILTER exposed a longstanding bug in
> do_syscall_trace_enter, whereby r0 (the 5th argument register) was
> mistakenly used where r3 (syscall_nr) was intended. By overwriting r0
> rather than r3 with -1 when attempting to block
Hi Rich!
On 9/3/20 7:48 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
> Addition of SECCOMP_FILTER exposed a longstanding bug in
> do_syscall_trace_enter, whereby r0 (the 5th argument register) was
> mistakenly used where r3 (syscall_nr) was intended. By overwriting r0
> rather than r3 with -1 when attempting to block
Addition of SECCOMP_FILTER exposed a longstanding bug in
do_syscall_trace_enter, whereby r0 (the 5th argument register) was
mistakenly used where r3 (syscall_nr) was intended. By overwriting r0
rather than r3 with -1 when attempting to block a syscall, the
existing code would instead have caused
12 matches
Mail list logo
