From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from todd.t-8ch.de (todd.t-8ch.de [159.69.126.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5C8F487BE for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 21:40:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=159.69.126.157 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730497245; cv=none; b=ExefDClp18mHxXxNm7lJtj7GSq/Q1HbBT+oaGHjNkAkz3/E8U1vacbROpTkC3WvXPkHII0aqBDsKTgE/dMr5BYHgFs1qzrWjfaQmPpJH6fXZpCZUgCekUwPKZnJLVOXN1QsVDqceZEswbLu9lC+AcugI4+gf1aw93suFaaaYLKc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730497245; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oF80iahe4vnM+k6iN3jR1ao3+51/yN1Mo4o0yamZzqo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rI2FAQkrBE98VBLQ0zY2sSM460UG0gXx+GUaHE2BbGh9FdjDsbNQE2iJZjQh5Mxnux3rsoOhchDYrsJmPeCL74co03IzMznnaVhQV0mzFv+jkmCRf53jpkjMvk20TPWA2UJM0PBKxdO9OZzuAWWYcCdmFi04YfHq99ZXxVyctZg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=weissschuh.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=weissschuh.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=weissschuh.net header.i=@weissschuh.net header.b=tAPvw2zP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=159.69.126.157 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=weissschuh.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=weissschuh.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=weissschuh.net header.i=@weissschuh.net header.b="tAPvw2zP" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=weissschuh.net; s=mail; t=1730497239; bh=oF80iahe4vnM+k6iN3jR1ao3+51/yN1Mo4o0yamZzqo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=tAPvw2zPNz+v4K3uQVVQ3GtdyTtKWwxuVHnaa3XQsQyqIYIjzpYsUo65b00XVl9dS qj+KFc9eP31FP9eLw8nSKmBwAk4SMvhM4mk2Ulinj3KquqRZuWjDf71bpzSZfcYMRz 77B236hCm3zITlR+C7h/5eTTbD8aEIIvzU13ys4Q= Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 21:40:34 +0000 From: Thomas =?utf-8?Q?Wei=C3=9Fschuh?= To: Willy Tarreau Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] nolibc changes for v6.13 Message-ID: <49905050-8bea-498a-9a69-bbf7e00f30c8@t-8ch.de> References: <7bac1319-fe1c-454d-b96d-8344bdce3961@t-8ch.de> <20241101213314.GC15112@1wt.eu> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20241101213314.GC15112@1wt.eu> Hi Willy, On 2024-11-01 22:33:14+0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 09:23:48PM +0000, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > > > On 2024-11-01 13:22:17-0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 02:22:13PM +0000, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > > > > (resend to add missing Cc: LKML) > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > > > > > The following changes since commit 9852d85ec9d492ebef56dc5f229416c925758edc: > > > > > > > > Linux 6.12-rc1 (2024-09-29 15:06:19 -0700) > > > > > > > > are available in the Git repository at: > > > > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nolibc/linux-nolibc.git tags/nolibc-20241101-for-6.13-1 > > > > > > > > for you to fetch changes up to ad0558f3883130954ca724697f2d19aef93967b3: > > > > > > > > selftests/nolibc: start qemu with 1 GiB of memory (2024-10-07 21:57:45 +0200) > > > > > > Thank you! I have pulled this into -rcu at signed tag nolibc.2024.11.01a, > > > which copies from your signed tag. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > The usual "make run" and "make user" worked fine, but "make libc-test" > > > gave me the build errors shown below. Is there some setup step that > > > I omitted? Or is this not really a necessary test? > > > > That test does not actually test nolibc but the nolibc test suite. > > It uses your system libc and makes sure that the nolibc test > > expectations match the behaviour of a "real" libc. > > The missing strlcat() function was added to glibc only in 2.38, so I > > guess you have an older version. > > On my glibc 2.40 "make libc-test" works and the test itself succeeds. > > > > I'll see if there is a reasonable to make libc-test work on older glibc. > > But it shouldn't impact this cycle. > > Maybe we could just enclose the test with: > > #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || __GLIBC__ > 2 || __GLIBC_MINOR__ >= 40 > ... > #endif This will mess up the test case numbers. The test is actually only running on nolibc anyways, so we could also stub out strlcat() with a dummy inline function. > The real libc test is indeed not critical but it's important that we try > to keep it working reasonably well over the long term as it reminds us > not to diverge too much. Agreed. > > For better architecture coverage I would recommend ./run-tests.sh over > > "make run/user". Speaking about this I remember the discussion from the > > 6.12 PR where Willy proposed an improved run-tests.sh error message. > > It seems he didn't push it as a commit, so let's add keep it in mind for > > next cycle. > > Oups, I vaguely remember proposing a trivial patch in an e-mail a while > ago but I don't even remember what it was about. My mind is totally taken > by the upcoming haproxy release these days :-/ It's at https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZtlQbpgpn9OQOPyI@1wt.eu/ No worries, I'll pick it up after 6.13-rc1. Thomas