From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 12314 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2020 14:47:53 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 31 Oct 2020 14:47:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 14041 invoked by uid 550); 31 Oct 2020 14:47:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 14023 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2020 14:47:48 -0000 Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 10:47:36 -0400 From: Rich Felker To: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20201031144735.GJ534@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20201027211735.GV534@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20201030185205.GA10849@arya.arvanta.net> <20201030185716.GE534@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <5298816.XTEcGr0bgB@nanabozho> <20201031092204.527aac8e@vostro.wlan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201031092204.527aac8e@vostro.wlan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH v2] MT fork On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 09:22:04AM +0200, Timo Teras wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 15:31:54 -0600 > Ariadne Conill wrote: > > > On Friday, October 30, 2020 12:57:17 PM MDT Rich Felker wrote: > > > There was a regression in musl too, I think. With > > > 27b2fc9d6db956359727a66c262f1e69995660aa you should be able to > > > re-enable parallel mark. If you get a chance to test, let us know if > > > it works for you. > > > > I have pushed current musl git plus the MT fork patch to Alpine edge > > as Alpine musl 1.2.2_pre0, and reenabling parallel mark has worked > > fine. > > > > It would be nice to have a musl 1.2.2 release that I can use for the > > source tarball instead of a git snapshot, but this will do for now. > > And now firefox is utterly broken. Though seems to be not related to MT > fork patch. > > Bisected it down to commit b8b729bd22c28c9116c2fce65dce207a35299c26 > "fix missing O_LARGEFILE values on x86_64, x32, and mips64" > > I think this breaks the seccomp because now e.g. fopen() calls has this > bit set for the syscall and seccomp does not like it. > > Wondering whether to fix firefox seccomp ignore this bit, or if this > commit needs reconsideration? Firefox needs to be fixed. A seccomp filter error is *always* the filter being wrong. Further, there should be a real audit of these filters (I'm willing to do it myself if someone can dig up the code I need to look at) to prevent this kind of thing preemptively. Any reasonable review would have shown this code was wrong if blocking the bit was specific to x86_64 and a few other archs, and if it's not specific, all the other archs were already broken. I'm pretty sure we'll find a lot of other issues that need to be fixed, some of them probably breaking less-popular archs right now. Rich