| Re: [chrony-dev] [PATCH] sys_linux: allow clock_gettime64 in seccomp filter |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More chrony.tuxfamily.org/chrony-dev Archives
]
- To: chrony-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [chrony-dev] [PATCH] sys_linux: allow clock_gettime64 in seccomp filter
- From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 15:35:07 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1589463312; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=H8Ixdi3Lf8HfCcronHCPSDkiCqIZXLVvcToHlL/9a2E=; b=NKzwxfBVNcsAu1OkwRsDQSgFmajRAMpay91WGmdZefXu/VadisWElxXmN/2/wM5boWkc6c uyhT/KpPhkQcw/qvUgTtj6p7pRMlJMzpRDTBR2YlqOfG9A8UaMLRbv5ELxjYG6Jn8vGKQs J3PjxZlGXp6y7H5N8Cj6H8vnUqpcwBM=
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 03:26:20PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> #ifdef __NR_clock_gettime64
> SCMP_SYS(clock_gettime64),
> #endif
>
> would fly for you‽
Yes.
> By the way, shouldn’t we add *time64 variants to some of our already
> whistelisted syscalls?
Yes, that would probably make sense. It looks like they were added in
the same libseccomp commit, so maybe they could be all together in a
single ifdef?
--
Miroslav Lichvar
--
To unsubscribe email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject.
For help email chrony-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "help" in the subject.
Trouble? Email listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.