[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6cb31334-8b39-4920-810e-de123898a2e0@t-8ch.de>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 07:21:38 +0200
From: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
To: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/nolibc: add support for Alpha
Hi Richard,
On 2025-07-13 16:21:58-0600, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 7/13/25 14:08, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
> > @@ -709,6 +709,10 @@ int run_startup(int min, int max)
> > /* checking NULL for argv/argv0, environ and _auxv is not enough, let's compare with sbrk(0) or &end */
> > extern char end;
> > char *brk = sbrk(0) != (void *)-1 ? sbrk(0) : &end;
> > +#if defined(__alpha__)
> > + /* the ordering above does not work on an alpha kernel */
> > + brk = NULL;
> > +#endif
>
> The syscall api is different for brk on alpha.
> A change to sys_brk or brk in include/nolibc/sys.h is required.
You are referring to osf_brk, right?
I think that should work as-is with the current wrappers.
On alpha, mm->brk and mm->arg_start are ordered differently from other
architectures. Personally I think the nolibc tests are a bit bogus here.
Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists