From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr (pegase1.c-s.fr [93.17.236.30]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 525AC3851C17; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 05:13:18 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 525AC3851C17 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=csgroup.eu Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu Received: from localhost (mailhub1-int [192.168.12.234]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49jplb2vW1z9v0mr; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:13:15 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at c-s.fr Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr ([192.168.12.234]) by localhost (pegase1.c-s.fr [192.168.12.234]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qopzQPgeMR79; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:13:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [192.168.25.192]) by pegase1.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49jplb1SChz9v0mq; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:13:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C8848B77C; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:13:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at c-s.fr Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id UVi1GQf-PVlC; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:13:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.4.90] (unknown [192.168.4.90]) by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05B688B75B; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:13:14 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: ppc64le and 32-bit LE userland compatibility To: Will Springer , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, eery@paperfox.es, daniel@octaforge.org, musl@lists.openwall.com, binutils@sourceware.org, libc-dev@lists.llvm.org References: <2047231.C4sosBPzcN@sheen> <8be94d2e-8e20-52b6-22e6-152b79a94139@csgroup.eu> <2498690.q0ZmV6gNhb@sheen> <1787237.g5d078U9FE@sheen> From: Christophe Leroy Message-ID: Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 07:13:08 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1787237.g5d078U9FE@sheen> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) 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, 12 Jun 2020 05:13:21 -0000 Le 06/06/2020 à 01:54, Will Springer a écrit : > On Saturday, May 30, 2020 3:17:24 PM PDT Will Springer wrote: >> On Saturday, May 30, 2020 8:37:43 AM PDT Christophe Leroy wrote: >>> There is a series at >>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=173231 >>> to switch powerpc to the Generic C VDSO. >>> >>> Can you try and see whether it fixes your issue ? >>> >>> Christophe >> >> Sure thing, I spotted that after making the initial post. Will report >> back with results. >> >> Will [she/her] > > Sorry for the wait, I just sat down to work on this again yesterday. > > Tested this series on top of stable/linux-5.7.y (5.7.0 at the time of > writing), plus the one-line signal handler patch. Had to rewind to the > state of powerpc/merge at the time of the mail before the patch would > apply, then cherry-picked to 5.6 until I realized the patchset used some > functionality that didn't land until 5.7, so I moved it there. > > Good news is that `date` now works correctly with the vdso call in 32-bit > LE. Bad news is it seems to have broken things on the 64-bit side—in my > testing, Void kicks off runit but hangs after starting eudev, and in a > Debian Stretch system, systemd doesn't get to the point of printing > anything whatsoever. (I had to `init=/bin/sh` to confirm the date worked > in ppcle, although in ppc64le running `date` also hung the system when it > made the vdso call...) Not sure how to approach debugging that, so I'd > appreciate any pointers. > Does it breaks only ppc64le vdso or also ppc64 (be) vdso ? I never had a chance to run any test on ppc64 as I only have a kernel cross compiler. Would you have a chance to build and run vdsotest from https://github.com/nathanlynch/vdsotest ? Thanks Christophe