[QUESTION] powerpc, libseccomp, and spu

[Paul Moore]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 9:50 AM Tom Hromatka <tom.hromatka at oracle.com> wrote:
> On 2/11/19 11:54 AM, Tom Hromatka wrote:
> > PowerPC experts,
> >
> > Paul Moore and I are working on the v2.4 release of libseccomp,
> > and as part of this work I need to update the syscall table for
> > each architecture.
> >
> > I have incorporated the new ppc syscall.tbl into libseccomp, but
> > I am not familiar with the value of "spu" in the ABI column.  For
> > example:
> >
> > 22    32    umount                sys_oldumount
> > 22    64    umount                sys_ni_syscall
> > 22    spu    umount                sys_ni_syscall
> >
> > In libseccomp, we maintain a 32-bit ppc syscall table and a 64-bit
> > ppc syscall table.  Do we also need to add a "spu" ppc syscall
> > table?  Some clarification on the syscalls marked "spu" and "nospu"
> > would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks for the awesome responses, Ben and Michael.  I'll definitely
> get Paul's input as well, but it sounds reasonable to exclude SPUs
> from the newest libseccomp release.

Based on this thread, I don't think we need to worry about "spu" at
this point in time.  Thanks everyone.

> Michael's recommendation to replace "nospu" with common" and ignore
> "spu" entirely has allowed ppc and ppc64 to pass all of our internal
> checks.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Tom

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com