From 4c6614dc86ad99208e7582108669831c4ab72982 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kees Cook Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2020 23:12:32 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] selftests/seccomp: Check ENOSYS under tracing There should be no difference between -1 and other negative syscalls while tracing. Cc: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Will Drewry Cc: Will Deacon Cc: Keno Fischer Signed-off-by: Kees Cook Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan --- tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c index 0ade3b0f595a..ab52eb100c92 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c @@ -1903,6 +1903,32 @@ FIXTURE_TEARDOWN(TRACE_syscall) teardown_trace_fixture(_metadata, self->tracer); } +TEST(negative_ENOSYS) +{ + /* Untraced negative syscalls should return ENOSYS. */ + errno = 0; + EXPECT_EQ(-1, syscall(-1)); + EXPECT_EQ(errno, ENOSYS); + errno = 0; + EXPECT_EQ(-1, syscall(-101)); + EXPECT_EQ(errno, ENOSYS); +} + +TEST_F(TRACE_syscall, negative_ENOSYS) +{ + /* + * There should be no difference between an "internal" skip + * and userspace asking for syscall "-1". + */ + errno = 0; + EXPECT_EQ(-1, syscall(-1)); + EXPECT_EQ(errno, ENOSYS); + /* And no difference for "still not valid but not -1". */ + errno = 0; + EXPECT_EQ(-1, syscall(-101)); + EXPECT_EQ(errno, ENOSYS); +} + TEST_F(TRACE_syscall, syscall_allowed) { /* getppid works as expected (no changes). */ -- 2.11.0