Re: nolibc patches, still possible for 6.5 ?

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On 2023-06-04 15:20:11+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hello Paul,
> 
> Thomas and Zhangjin have provided significant nolibc cleanups, and
> fixes, as well as preparation work to later support riscv32.
> 
> These consist in the following main series:
>   - generalization of stackprotector to other archs that were not
>     previously supported (riscv, mips, loongarch, arm, arm64)
> 
>   - general cleanups of the makefile, test report output, deduplication
>     of certain tests
> 
>   - slightly better compliance of some tests performed on certain syscalls
>     (e.g. no longer pass (void*)1 to gettimeofday() since glibc hates it).
> 
>   - add support for nanoseconds in stat() and statx()
> 
>   - fixes for some syscalls (e.g. ppoll() has 5 arguments not 4)
> 
>   - fixes around limits.h and  INT_MAX / INT_FAST64_MAX
> 
> I rebased the whole series on top of your latest dev branch (d19a9ca3d5)
> and it works fine for all archs.
> 
> I don't know if you're still planning on merging new stuff in this area
> for 6.5 or not (since I know that it involves new series of tests on your
> side as well), but given that Zhangjin will engage into deeper changes
> later for riscv32 that will likely imply to update more syscalls to use
> the time64 ones, I would prefer to split the cleanups from the hard stuff,
> but I'll let you judge based on the current state of what's pending for
> 6.5.
> 
> In any case I'm putting all this here for now (not for merge yet):
> 
>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wtarreau/nolibc.git 20230604-nolibc-rv32+stkp6
> 
> I'd like Thomas and Zhangjin to perform a last check to confirm they're
> OK with this final integration.

(Talking about 20230605-nolibc-rv32+stkp7,
but the same issue is in stkp6)

I noticed that the commit introducing prctl() comes *after* the one
making use of it.

8389cb4b55ae ("selftests/nolibc: prevent coredumps during test execution")
033c01b5a8f4 ("tools/nolibc: add support for prctl()")

This can lead to compiler errors and break bisectability.

They just need to be swapped.

Thomas