Added LoongArch architecture name

[zhaixiaojuan]

When running the runc test, an error message is reported: "enosys_linux_test.go:179: unknown libseccomp architecture "loong64": could convert unrecognized string "loong64"". After checking, it was found that the error was caused by the missing "loong64" in the seccomp.go file.

[LocutusOfBorg]

this is already merged in main

[kolyshkin]

OTOH the official Go name is loong64. Hmm.

[kolyshkin]

From what I see, the official name is loongarch64. While I find the arch substring redundant, it is what it is. For example, see https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/blob/7db46d72f13c172b290818f624c2966bd0db5677/src/arch.c#L210 in which we only have loongarch64 and not loong64.

[kolyshkin]

OTOH the official Go name is loong64. Hmm.

It doesn't matter, really. Say GOARCH is amd64 while seccomp's name is x86_64.

[kolyshkin]

IOW, this library should support the same names as libseccomp.

[zhaixiaojuan]

OTOH the official Go name is loong64. Hmm.

It doesn't matter, really. Say GOARCH is amd64 while seccomp's name is x86_64.

As you said, GOARCH is amd64, and the name of seccomp is x86_64, so in libseccomp-golang/seccomp.go(https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp-golang/blob/main/seccomp.go), the case branch adds x86_64 and amd64 to solve the name inconsistency problem:

`
switch strings.ToLower(arch) {
case "x86":
return ArchX86, nil
case "amd64", "x86-64", "x86_64", "x64":
return ArchAMD64, nil

`

For LoongArch, GOARCH is loong64 and seccomp is loongarch64. Similarly, we should include loong64 and loongarch64 in the case branch to solve the name inconsistency problem, runc is a good example, and this problem has blocked the runc test build upstream of debian.

[zhaixiaojuan]

this is already merged in main

Currently only loongarch64 is included, loong64 is missing:
case "loongarch64": return ArchLOONGARCH64, nil

For this problem, the relevant patch has been merged into Debian in advance(https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1095452).