linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC 5/5] x86,seccomp: Add a seccomp fastpath

To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] x86,seccomp: Add a seccomp fastpath
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 15:28:32 -0700
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
In-reply-to: <5398D7B4.5000303@zytor.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <cover.1402517933.git.luto@amacapital.net> <9e11cd988a0f120606e37b5e275019754e2774da.1402517933.git.luto@amacapital.net> <CAADnVQKt5FnShkZeQewbfnU1kHM-gLs3hCZMf5xcgFzyRDLX7A@mail.gmail.com> <CALCETrXoqqKC=T5Wvj+CDYQFte1s_=npDvQ2UYW0j=AanEgR1g@mail.gmail.com> <5398D59A.3030900@zytor.com> <CALCETrVMxkHcPXsEGtEc0Pr=Z80CzC0zWaQ9OdVdxi1CGuB4kQ@mail.gmail.com> <5398D7B4.5000303@zytor.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:27 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> On 06/11/2014 03:22 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>>> On 06/11/2014 02:56 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 13ns is with the simplest nonempty filter.  I hope that empty filters
>>>> don't work.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why wouldn't they?
>>
>> Is it permissible to fall off the end of a BPF program?  I'm getting
>> EINVAL trying to install an actual empty filter.  The filter I tested
>> with was:
>>
>
> What I meant was that there has to be a well-defined behavior for the
> program falling off the end anyway, and that that should be preserved.
>
> I guess it is possible to require that all code paths must provably
> reach a termination point.
>

Dunno.  I haven't ever touched any of the actual BPF code.  This whole
patchset only changes the code that invokes the BPF evaluator.

--Andy

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>