On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 01:49:44PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 8 April 2016 at 13:39, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > In that message I was referring to arm/aarch64 (the only arch at the
> > time that cared about cacheflush). 2.2.0 was the first version arm got
> > any cacheflush support (same versio
On 8 April 2016 at 13:39, Andrew Jones wrote:
> In that message I was referring to arm/aarch64 (the only arch at the
> time that cared about cacheflush). 2.2.0 was the first version arm got
> any cacheflush support (same version as x86 an mips), but it was
> completely wrong until 2.2.1. Additiona
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 12:54:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 8 April 2016 at 12:45, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 09:29:15AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> >> The cacheflush system call (found on MIPS and ARM) has been included in
> >> the libseccomp header since 2.2.0, so in
On 8 April 2016 at 12:45, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 09:29:15AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
>> The cacheflush system call (found on MIPS and ARM) has been included in
>> the libseccomp header since 2.2.0, so include include it back to that
>> version. Previously it was only enable
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 09:29:15AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> The cacheflush system call (found on MIPS and ARM) has been included in
> the libseccomp header since 2.2.0, so include include it back to that
> version. Previously it was only enabled since 2.2.3 since that is when
> it was enabled pr
The cacheflush system call (found on MIPS and ARM) has been included in
the libseccomp header since 2.2.0, so include include it back to that
version. Previously it was only enabled since 2.2.3 since that is when
it was enabled properly for ARM.
This will allow seccomp support to be enabled for MI
