[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <90038e09-69fd-4a8c-b925-007dbac986f4@igalia.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 12:50:24 -0300
From: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] selftests/futex: fix futex_wait() for 32bit ARM
Em 27/08/2025 10:00, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior escreveu:
> From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
>
> On 32bit ARM systems gcc-12 will use 32bit timestamps while gcc-13 and
> later will use 64bit timestamps. The problem is that SYS_futex will
> continue pointing at the 32bit system call. This makes the futex_wait
> test fail like this:
>
> waiter failed errno 110
> not ok 1 futex_wake private returned: 0 Success
> waiter failed errno 110
> not ok 2 futex_wake shared (page anon) returned: 0 Success
> waiter failed errno 110
> not ok 3 futex_wake shared (file backed) returned: 0 Success
>
> Instead of compiling differently depending on the gcc version, use the
> -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_TIME_BITS=64 options to ensure that we are
> building with 64bit timestamps. Then use ifdefs to make SYS_futex point
> to the 64bit system call.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
> Tested-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ebd4a415169f9a3153bbd3c1fe6244511c9d1cb3.1756217858.git.dan.carpenter@linaro.org
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Reviewed-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists