{"action":"closed","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/seccomp/libseccomp/issues/40","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/seccomp/libseccomp","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/seccomp/libseccomp/issues/40/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/seccomp/libseccomp/issues/40/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/seccomp/libseccomp/issues/40/events","html_url":"https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/issues/40","id":159654071,"number":40,"title":"strange behaviour on v4.4 kernels with libseccomp v2.3.1","user":{"login":"xnox","id":19779,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/19779?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox","html_url":"https://github.com/xnox","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xnox/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":2,"created_at":"2016-06-10T14:57:23Z","updated_at":"2016-06-10T17:01:34Z","closed_at":"2016-06-10T17:01:34Z","body":"Hello,\r\n\r\nI'm in a i686 chroot, and using scmp_sys_resolver I see multiple regression with syscall look-ups. The tests I run is to check that number->name->number lookups are roundtrip safe, and they appear to not be as per below:\r\n```\r\n# ./scmp_sys_resolver 373\r\nshutdown\r\n# ./scmp_sys_resolver shutdown\r\n-113\r\n# ./scmp_sys_resolver '\\-113'\r\n-1\r\n# ./scmp_sys_resolver -t shutdown\r\n102\r\n# ./scmp_sys_resolver 102\r\nsocketcall\r\n```\r\n\r\nMy expectation was for the output to just be:\r\n```\r\n# ./scmp_sys_resolver 373\r\nshutdown\r\n# ./scmp_sys_resolver shutdown\r\n373\r\n```\r\n\r\nI see this regression for other syscalls too, on i686 and on s390x architectures.\r\namd64 and ppc64el pass correctly.\r\n\r\ns390x failures:\r\n```\r\nFAIL: 357 (recvmmsg) != recvmmsg (-119)\r\nFAIL: 358 (sendmmsg) != sendmmsg (-120)\r\nFAIL: 359 (socket) != socket (-101)\r\nFAIL: 360 (socketpair) != socketpair (-108)\r\nFAIL: 361 (bind) != bind (-102)\r\nFAIL: 362 (connect) != connect (-103)\r\nFAIL: 363 (listen) != listen (-104)\r\nFAIL: 364 (accept4) != accept4 (-118)\r\nFAIL: 365 (getsockopt) != getsockopt (-115)\r\nFAIL: 366 (setsockopt) != setsockopt (-114)\r\nFAIL: 367 (getsockname) != getsockname (-106)\r\nFAIL: 368 (getpeername) != getpeername (-107)\r\nFAIL: 369 (sendto) != sendto (-111)\r\nFAIL: 370 (sendmsg) != sendmsg (-116)\r\nFAIL: 371 (recvfrom) != recvfrom (-112)\r\nFAIL: 372 (recvmsg) != recvmsg (-117)\r\nFAIL: 373 (shutdown) != shutdown (-113)\r\n```\r\n\r\ni686 failures:\r\n```\r\nFAIL: 337 (recvmmsg) != recvmmsg (-119)\r\nFAIL: 345 (sendmmsg) != sendmmsg (-120)\r\nFAIL: 359 (socket) != socket (-101)\r\nFAIL: 360 (socketpair) != socketpair (-108)\r\nFAIL: 361 (bind) != bind (-102)\r\nFAIL: 362 (connect) != connect (-103)\r\nFAIL: 363 (listen) != listen (-104)\r\nFAIL: 364 (accept4) != accept4 (-118)\r\nFAIL: 365 (getsockopt) != getsockopt (-115)\r\nFAIL: 366 (setsockopt) != setsockopt (-114)\r\nFAIL: 367 (getsockname) != getsockname (-106)\r\nFAIL: 368 (getpeername) != getpeername (-107)\r\nFAIL: 369 (sendto) != sendto (-111)\r\nFAIL: 370 (sendmsg) != sendmsg (-116)\r\nFAIL: 371 (recvfrom) != recvfrom (-112)\r\nFAIL: 372 (recvmsg) != recvmsg (-117)\r\nFAIL: 373 (shutdown) != shutdown (-113)\r\n```\r\n\r\nAre my expectation somehow wrong? is v4.5 kernel required for v2.3.1 release? Is there a bug in compat between kernel versions?"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"xnox"}}