From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9434F3858403 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 21:09:48 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9434F3858403 Received: from mail-qt1-f197.google.com (mail-qt1-f197.google.com [209.85.160.197]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-610-Wyj-g-ooNt6RjJzHlIAeFg-1; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:09:45 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Wyj-g-ooNt6RjJzHlIAeFg-1 Received: by mail-qt1-f197.google.com with SMTP id c13-20020ac81e8d000000b002c402f6db41so8944122qtm.11 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:09:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=x5YJoWMInAKF/239DnfX+HN5hTcuZLIY0bBCQ1fEvMA=; b=Diud/vGpmd57uWIDUTE9O2b1shm4/mvrWgU5IuTiukldsyc7rarjn6mlj06EnrQhWm l4aXwwjTraLMyVMNvt7YqpAc6IuXo/cZA0WCX6z6Q9MKKs7F/pLtwu4a9yEziPW78yI2 jZe6hA9KABsZSlfOZA9i1ZXe/I65/1mtTfMvyTYIDAhsyQ7dTlcGWpYGJTtTQtI/mrRQ 6Bo0JdDwLBCWfWyPoMaKBzNCaAY0ly+0AVUTHGrizun4JmmZxiNazcmqb+yKxGv/B81H d9knVfAbXPJEpDMXpHXhTSSAVonIBGQVI5jcTeeKyfYa/byYQuA/wPh+DfqOe+Ou0Rt7 jeCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531RDV47Q2y3OpuOdl8rPvGhzf1VVmcd1uzPcOrI8VhQnNPzJnM0 9P7x6PVhZ+nsf0p6WLim7R+ejoZcughaOr47IO5RaOPc75HX73esN0f1B0ky9zauxvlKxI4MT2+ /Tls2x1KHqhL/qEekO64/ X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2307:: with SMTP id gc7mr9622227qvb.7.1642194584256; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:09:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwBloNTmS2SzWcWAZYVSyFwNmLhSak/xLe8YV5xJghte9Ykg6dLOaPe1Q1V77NhffKw72avUQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2307:: with SMTP id gc7mr9622212qvb.7.1642194584079; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:09:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.241] (135-23-175-80.cpe.pppoe.ca. [135.23.175.80]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w9sm4544229qko.71.2022.01.14.13.09.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:09:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <51c4a93d-ab7d-f56d-0ac3-0c0a2b287e9a@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:09:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0 Subject: Re: glibc 2.35 failures in elf/tst-cpu-features-cpuinfo-static. To: Florian Weimer , "H.J. Lu" Cc: Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha References: <056482b8-d413-2e24-a546-98ea46e68710@redhat.com> <87ee5aqmla.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <87tue6p4n6.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> From: Carlos O'Donell Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <87tue6p4n6.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 21:09:51 -0000 On 1/14/22 13:13, Florian Weimer wrote: > * H. J. Lu: > >> On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 9:00 AM Florian Weimer wrote: >>> >>> * Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha: >>> >>>> Checking HAS_CPU_FEATURE (RTM): >>>> HAS_CPU_FEATURE (RTM): 1 >>>> cpuinfo (rtm): 0 >>>> *** failure *** >>> >>> Could you pin this test to specific CPUs and see if it behaves >>> differently depending on the CPU? >>> >> >> Hi Carlos, >> >> I believe you ran into: >> >> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28033 >> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000059422/processors.html >> >> Specifically your CPU is listed as >> >> 06_9EH <=0xC 8th/9th Generation Intel® Core™ Processors and Intel® >> Pentium® Processors based on Coffee Lake microarchitecture >> >> I think we should black list all CPUs on the list. > > I think Siddhesh ran into this before, after laptop suspend. It's a > firmware or kernel bug that the CPUID state across cores is inconsistent > after suspend. It's not a glibc issue. Can we make our testing detect this and mark the test XFAIL? Or as HJ say, blacklist the CPU from the test e.g. UNSUPPORTED? -- Cheers, Carlos.