> @Dan did that already contain the fix you expect or would considering
a seccomp be useful?
For libseccomp, it looks like it doesn't need a rebuild; it appears to
only reference the symbol in its header (which is what causes this
problem for other packages that pull in that header); in its code, the
only reference is where its syscall number is defined is inside its
ppc64_syscall_table (and ppc_syscall_table), where it is defined
correctly.
ddstreet@thorin:~/bugs/lp1821625/sym-check/libseccomp/libseccomp-2.4.1$ grep -r
pkey_mprotect
include/seccomp.h.in:#define __PNR_pkey_mprotect -10201
include/seccomp.h.in:#ifndef __NR_pkey_mprotect
include/seccomp.h.in:#define __NR_pkey_mprotect __PNR_pkey_mprotect
include/seccomp.h.in:#endif /* __NR_pkey_mprotect */
include/seccomp.h:#define __PNR_pkey_mprotect -10201
include/seccomp.h:#ifndef __NR_pkey_mprotect
include/seccomp.h:#define __NR_pkey_mprotect __PNR_pkey_mprotect
include/seccomp.h:#endif /* __NR_pkey_mprotect */
src/arch-ppc-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", 386 },
src/arch-x32-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", (X32_SYSCALL_BIT + 329) },
src/arch-mips-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", (__SCMP_NR_BASE + 363) },
src/arch-x86-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", 380 },
src/arch-s390-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", __PNR_pkey_mprotect },
src/arch-parisc-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", __PNR_pkey_mprotect },
src/arch-s390x-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", __PNR_pkey_mprotect },
src/arch-ppc64-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", 386 },
src/arch-aarch64-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", 288 },
src/arch-arm-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", (__SCMP_NR_BASE + 394) },
src/arch-mips64-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", (__SCMP_NR_BASE + 323) },
src/arch-x86_64-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", 329 },
src/arch-mips64n32-syscalls.c: { "pkey_mprotect", (__SCMP_NR_BASE + 327) },
I still don't understand why libseccomp ever decided to define
__NR_pkey_mprotect to a negative number (if the kernel header doesn't define
it) in its public header file. IMHO that should be done in its code, or at
least in a private header file.
** Changed in: libseccomp (Ubuntu Bionic)
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
** Changed in: libseccomp (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1821625
Title:
systemd 237-3ubuntu10.14 ADT test failure on Bionic ppc64el (test-
seccomp)
Status in libseccomp package in Ubuntu:
Invalid
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
Fix Released
Status in systemd package in Ubuntu:
Invalid
Status in libseccomp source package in Bionic:
Invalid
Status in linux source package in Bionic:
Fix Committed
Status in systemd source package in Bionic:
Invalid
Bug description:
Starting with systemd 237-3ubuntu10.14, the testcase test-seccomp is
failing on Bionic on ppc64el with the error messages:
Operating on architecture: ppc
Failed to add n/a() rule for architecture ppc, skipping: Bad address
Operating on architecture: ppc64
Failed to add n/a() rule for architecture ppc64, skipping: Bad address
Operating on architecture: ppc64-le
Failed to add n/a() rule for architecture ppc64-le, skipping: Numerical
argument out of domain
Assertion 'p == MAP_FAILED' failed at ../src/test/test-seccomp.c:413,
function test_memory_deny_write_execute_mmap(). Aborting.
memoryseccomp-mmap terminated by signal ABRT.
Assertion 'wait_for_terminate_and_check("memoryseccomp-mmap", pid, WAIT_LOG)
== EXIT_SUCCESS' failed at ../src/test/test-seccomp.c:427, function
test_memory_deny_write_execute_mmap(). Aborting.
Aborted (core dumped)
FAIL: test-seccomp (code: 134)
Full logs at:
https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-bionic/bionic/ppc64el/s/systemd/20190302_025135_d0e38@/log.gz
The testcase passed with systemd version 237-3ubuntu10.13 running on the same
4.15.0-45 kernel on ppc64el:
https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-bionic/bionic/ppc64el/s/systemd/20190228_154406_6b12f@/log.gz
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libseccomp/+bug/1821625/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
