-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 919
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
doc(userspace): provide users with a correct message when some syscalls are not defined #2329
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Andrea Terzolo <andrea.terzolo@polito.it>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Terzolo <andrea.terzolo@polito.it> Co-authored-by: Federico Di Pierro <nierro92@gmail.com>
/milestone 0.34.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: adab53f22ae55502da22b2f74bf3dc5ff4ccdc68
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Andreagit97, FedeDP, leogr 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 |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
/kind documentation
Any specific area of the project related to this PR?
/area engine
What this PR does / why we need it:
As reported by @happy-dude here #2326, when running Falco on
aarch64
, Falco logs a misleading error message. Take as an example the issue log:All these syscalls are not defined on
aarch64
architectures but Falco is not yet able to detect it! As a first step, I would fix the log just to let the user know what is happening under the hood. Obviously, this is not the final solution, which will require some changes in the libraries to detect this sort of behavior, for this reason, the final fix will be shipped only inFalco 0.35
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: