lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 01:35:06 +0300 From: Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com> To: "Zhangjian (Bamvor)" <bamvor.zhangjian@...wei.com> CC: <arnd@...db.de>, <catalin.marinas@....com>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <pinskia@...il.com>, <Prasun.Kapoor@...iumnetworks.com>, <schwab@...e.de>, <broonie@...nel.org>, <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>, <agraf@...e.de>, <klimov.linux@...il.com>, <jan.dakinevich@...il.com>, <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>, <Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com>, <joseph@...esourcery.com>, <christoph.muellner@...obroma-systems.com> Subject: Re: [RFC5 PATCH v6 00/21] ILP32 for ARM64 On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 12:15:45PM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > Hi, Yury > > On 1:09 2016/1/30, Yury Norov wrote: > >On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:59:33PM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>On 1:22 2016/1/15, Yury Norov wrote: > >>>This is still RFC because we have no glibc yet, that correspnds new ABI > >>>introduced here. And so we cannot run tests. LP64 and AARCH32 tests show > >>>no regression though. > >>Hi, > >> > >>Glad to see this version. I hope I could test it. Where could I find the > >>corresponding glibc? I could not find it in > >>http://github.com/norov/glibc.git. Or is there a plan to do it? > >> > >>Besides compat wrappers discussed in these series, is there any other > >>blockers for upstream? I would suppose everyone is intestested in the > >>result of LTP... > >> > >>Regards > >> > >>Bamvor > >> > > > >Hi, Bamvor, > > > >Just to order all commits, I created new ILP32 branch at [1], that > >based on 4.4 kernel + [2] + [3]. There's no new glibc suitable for > >rfc5. But I started with it, and I hope there will be progress soon. > Cool:) > > > >You cannot run LTP as there are some syscalls that are called during > >dynamic loading that fail, but you can try to build your test statically > >agaginst current glibc, and there's a big chance it will work. > >I have a set of 'hello-worlds' working that way. > Currrently, I got 300+ in ltplite with you glibc[1]. I will try static link > later. > > > >If you have some specific test that you cannot run, you can send it to > >me, and I will take a look on it. > Sure, I am reading the test results. Hope we could fix these failure > together. > > Regards > > Bamvor > > [1] https://github.com/norov/glibc/tree/thunderx-ilp32-32time_toff_t > > > >Yury > > > >[1] https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/rfc5 > >[2] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2116021 > >[3] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2134747 > > > >>> > >>> v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/3/704 > >>> v4: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/13/691 > >>> v5: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/29/911 > >>> Hi Bamvor, everybody, I have new glibc that follows new ABI: https://github.com/norov/glibc/tree/new-api It's very draft and dirty, but you can try it with RFC5. My fail list for ltplite looks like this: pipeio_4 FAIL 11 abort01 FAIL 2 clone02 FAIL 4 kill10 FAIL 2 kill11 FAIL 2 lstat01A FAIL 1 lstat02 FAIL 1 mmap16 FAIL 6 nanosleep03 FAIL 1 nftw01 FAIL 1 nftw6401 FAIL 1 open12 FAIL 2 pathconf01 FAIL 1 pipe07 FAIL 2 profil01 FAIL 11 readdir01 FAIL 1 readlink01A FAIL 1 rename11 FAIL 2 rmdir02 FAIL 2 sigaltstack01 FAIL 1 sigaltstack02 FAIL 1 stat03 FAIL 1 stat04 FAIL 1 stat06 FAIL 1 umount2_01 FAIL 2 umount2_02 FAIL 2 umount2_03 FAIL 2 utime06 FAIL 2 writev01 FAIL 1 mtest06 FAIL 11 rwtest01 FAIL 2 rwtest02 FAIL 2 rwtest03 FAIL 2 rwtest04 FAIL 2 rwtest05 FAIL 2 Float tests are exluded, but also fail. Totally, ~40 of 787 tests fail. Yury
Powered by blists - more mailing lists