Skip to content

Conversation

@drakenclimber
Copy link
Member

x32 syscalls require the X32_SYSCALL_BIT (0x4000 0000) to be set, and thus syscalls less than that are invalid on the x32 architecture. Tests 60 and 61 utilize syscalls less than 0x4000 0000, so skip those tests for the x32 arch.

Fixes Github Issue #472.

Reported-by: Sam James sam@gentoo.org

x32 syscalls require the X32_SYSCALL_BIT (0x4000 0000) to be
set, and thus syscalls less than that are invalid on the x32
architecture.  Tests 60 and 61 utilize syscalls less than
0x4000 0000, so skip those tests for the x32 arch.

Fixes Github Issue seccomp#472.

Reported-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
Signed-off-by: Tom Hromatka <tom.hromatka@oracle.com>
@drakenclimber drakenclimber added this to the v2.6.1 milestone Aug 29, 2025
@drakenclimber drakenclimber requested a review from pcmoore August 29, 2025 17:29
@drakenclimber drakenclimber self-assigned this Aug 29, 2025
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 89.046%. remained the same
when pulling 9a2a659 on drakenclimber:issues/472
into e7e633c on seccomp:main.

@pcmoore
Copy link
Member

pcmoore commented Aug 30, 2025

Merged via 9b9ea8e with some indent fixes on the test headers for proper alignment, thanks!

@pcmoore pcmoore closed this Aug 30, 2025
@pcmoore
Copy link
Member

pcmoore commented Aug 30, 2025

Oops, forgot to add the commit ID for the release-2.6 backport, here it is: 311cb32

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants