Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[3.2] seccomp: propagate defaultErrnoRet #11033

Merged

Conversation

kolyshkin
Copy link
Contributor

@kolyshkin kolyshkin commented Jul 24, 2021

This fixes the issue of not propagating defaultErrnoRet from
system's seccomp.json to container's config.json, which can
result in redundant seccomp rules and inability to start a container
when using some runtimes (notably runc up to and including 1.0.1).

The fix is to vendor in containers/common with the fixed pkg/seccomp
which no longer ignores defaultErrnoRet.

Fixes: #11031

Proposed changelog entry

Bugfixes:
 * Fixed a bug of ignoring the `defaultErrnoRet` field in system's seccomp.json,
   which may cause an "error adding seccomp filter rule for syscall" error
   and a failure to start a container when using `--runtime=runc` (#11031).

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 24, 2021
This fixes the issue of not propagating defaultErrnoRet from
system's seccomp.json to container's config.json, which can
result in redundant seccomp rules and inability to start a container
when using some runtimes (notably runc up to and including 1.0.1).

The fix is to vendor in containers/common with the fixed pkg/seccomp
which no longer ignores defaultErrnoRet.

Brought to you by:
  go get github.com/containers/[email protected]

Signed-off-by: Kir Kolyshkin <[email protected]>
@kolyshkin kolyshkin force-pushed the 3.2-default-errno-ret branch from 9980531 to a1e1edb Compare July 25, 2021 10:53
@kolyshkin kolyshkin marked this pull request as ready for review July 25, 2021 10:53
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 25, 2021
@kolyshkin
Copy link
Contributor Author

no longer a draft

@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Jul 26, 2021

/approve
/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 26, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 26, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kolyshkin, rhatdan

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 26, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 5ef6c01 into containers:v3.2 Jul 26, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Sep 22, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 22, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants