On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Paul Moore <p...@paul-moore.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> wrote: >> On Mar 5, 2015 10:32 AM, "David Drysdale" <drysd...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Do we currently expect the audit system to work with x32 syscalls? >>> >>> I was playing with the audit system for the first time today (on >>> v4.0-rc2, due to [1]), and it didn't seem to work for me. (Tweaking >>> ptrace.c like the patch below seemed to help, but I may just have >>> configured something wrong.) >>> >>> I know there was a bunch of activity around this area in mid-2014, >>> but I'm not sure what the final position was... >> >> It's totally broken, and it needs ABI work. I think it should keep >> the high syscall numbers, which means that both userspace and the >> audit core need to learn how to deal with it. > > What Andy said. It's on the list of things to fix, but to be brutally > honest, it's not very high on the list due to lack of interest from > people asking for audit/x32 support.
Fair enough -- thanks for letting me know. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
