RFE: basic infrastructure for tracking per-syscall/ABI kernel versions

[pcmoore]

This commit adds basic support for tracking what kernel introduced a syscall for a given arch/ABI. It does not provide any of that kernel version information, leaving only a SCMP_KV_UNDEF placeholder, nor does it attempt to do anything meaningful with this new source of information; this patch simply establishes a new syscalls.csv format so that we can start properly recording the kernel versions.

Signed-off-by: Paul Moore [email protected]

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 89.604% when pulling 0dfe829 on pcmoore:working-syscall into 832b65b on seccomp:main.

[drakenclimber]

Thanks, @pcmoore!!! I have built upon what you've done and populated the x86_64_kver column. See this branch.

I'll give it a more thorough code review later, but functionality-wise it seems to be working well.

[pcmoore]

Thanks, @pcmoore!!! I have built upon what you've done and populated the x86_64_kver column. See this branch.

Thanks for taking a quick look, let me know if anything pops up on closer inspection.

Also, thanks for all your work in putting together the scripting to determine the kernel versions. Looking at your branch, a few things come to mind:

• We probably need to pick a "no earlier than" version where we simply won't go back any further if only to put a practical bound on the work involved in doing the initial population. The earliest form of seccomp mode 2, prctl(SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER), was introduced in Linux v3.5 so perhaps that is as good of an epoch as any. We could also start with SCMP_KV_3_5 = 100 to give us some wiggle room if we needed to go earlier at a later date.
• One of the main reasons why so much of the non-C libseccomp scripting is done in Bash is because I really dislike additional build dependencies, and Bash is pretty ubiquitous. However, as I mentioned in the other thread, I think it may be okay here because I don't think we really need to check-in whatever tool we use to do the initial kver population; we run the tool to generate the CSV fields initially, then it's just a matter of making sure we add the kver fields when we add new syscalls. It shouldn't be a problem.

Thoughts?

[drakenclimber]

Thanks for taking a quick look, let me know if anything pops up on closer inspection.

Will do.

Also, thanks for all your work in putting together the scripting to determine the kernel versions. Looking at your branch, a few things come to mind:

* We probably need to pick a "no earlier than" version where we simply won't go back any further if only to put a practical bound on the work involved in doing the initial population.  The earliest form of seccomp mode 2, `prctl(SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER)`, was introduced in Linux v3.5 so perhaps that is as good of an epoch as any.  We could also start with `SCMP_KV_3_5 = 100` to give us some wiggle room if we needed to go earlier at a later date.

Sounds good to me. I arbitrarily started with v5.4 because that's the base kernel of Oracle's UEK6. Going back to v3.5 makes more sense from seccomp's point of view. I'll make that change.

And the 100 enum trickery is a good idea.

* One of the main reasons why so much of the non-C libseccomp scripting is done in Bash is because I really dislike additional build dependencies, and Bash is pretty ubiquitous.  However, as I mentioned in the other thread, I think it may be okay here because I don't think we really need to check-in whatever tool we use to do the initial kver population; we run the tool to generate the CSV fields initially, then it's just a matter of making sure we add the kver fields when we add new syscalls.  It shouldn't be a problem.

Thanks. That's a really solid vision to only rely on Bash. I don't recall hearing you say that before.

arch-populate-version.py is definitely a one-off script that wouldn't be part of the ./autogen.sh && ./configure && make process, so I agree it doesn't need to meet the Bash requirement. I'm ambivalent whether we check it in or not.

I have a rough draft of a script that can turn the syscalls.csv versions into a C header file. It's currently in Python3, but I think it should be do-able to convert it to Bash.

Thanks!

[drakenclimber]

I incorporated your latest recommendations into my branch, @pcmoore. I think they were excellent improvements.

[drakenclimber]

@pcmoore, I noticed this oddity when running arch-syscall-validate. Not sure of the root cause:

$ ./arch-syscall-validate <kernel_src_path>
...
--- sh [library]
+++ sh [system]
@@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
-     0,0
 accept,344
 accept4,358
 access,33

[drakenclimber]

@pcmoore, I noticed this oddity when running arch-syscall-validate. Not sure of the root cause:

$ ./arch-syscall-validate <kernel_src_path>
...
--- sh [library]
+++ sh [system]
@@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
-     0,0
 accept,344
 accept4,358
 access,33

It's an easy fix. A newline was accidentally inserted into syscalls.csv on line 2. Removing that cleaned up the issue.

[drakenclimber]

Acked-by: Tom Hromatka <[email protected]>

[pcmoore]

FYI, I just force pushed a slight change that moves the scmp_kver enum from include/syscalls.h.in to src/system.h; this should allow us work on this without potentially adding anything new to published API and potentially causing problems for us later. Once we have everything set we can move the definition back into include/syscalls.h.in.

[drakenclimber]

FYI, I just force pushed a slight change that moves the scmp_kver enum from include/syscalls.h.in to src/system.h; this should allow us work on this without potentially adding anything new to published API and potentially causing problems for us later. Once we have everything set we can move the definition back into include/syscalls.h.in.

Good call. Thanks, @pcmoore

[pcmoore]

Merged via 72198d9, thanks for the review!