From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oo1-xc2f.google.com (mail-oo1-xc2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2f]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 808B03858D1E for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 06:13:52 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 808B03858D1E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dabbelt.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dabbelt.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 808B03858D1E Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2f ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1705040035; cv=none; b=GhvAcdt1haGOb9ew4/kaJAFhze0ltshjjNODDVcrpTxjqKTeulwiy1Q+mk8APHP2ZQW3132TqMeg+DYQ7dski0nlrMj16D8ozZDL+Nx2DZuwsr8S72hPAVNFcL127WJ+OSCH/NLYGPklPc2P7u0Pp3zc69a8+1bNr86IXHLvKlI= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1705040035; c=relaxed/simple; bh=s+d4mrskT/QBRkDQdOgEK9GIOoJz7vCEFnlgBOMLDB4=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID; b=dibh1/zWvMCHDAKfBXCmEV4Dz6EdjtfVR+0HC+pmWH7Ik5XHi2WrEDH55I5Y32/6kfsGy+fU0DwBanSgHq/RzpvfP1gKlybTuoPo8N1NrTlxAx/i2zAAbDSpsYwaWS2XmhDzCrqn4gURRK89u/C0mWmpRL4+xBAxHervcQSVZp0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: by mail-oo1-xc2f.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-59612e4a21eso2174624eaf.3 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 22:13:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dabbelt-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1705040032; x=1705644832; darn=sourceware.org; h=message-id:to:from:cc:in-reply-to:subject:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=612FaUtyWHrQgcfBp0FBDfndQtqCY0UtlrRZEx2qFTo=; b=By7JBhMwO2nEb1CYqASgCsxtWBKHLvVYKWLubGor16D2yMjX3ZGNKbxHZaDMMd3oLs l+QGpGPo78AY93+UQTQS7OWAAjvaVZ/dRn4Z23VwxrNLFX9D/lCRXB4MSj88aTMvi5qM dfhdWz/mNhI01lMNcmxOB4immzvgX4InhmLpTlamvEFkoEpD0pjQaV9/9c8Cl6jxFR2k NXrH5St4okc1vYkwwJ2s4HeKX/a6IFKQXiqKnwlF9x4JOpTvtoRZ4Gkil7cb0Hb4gYQM xFIgx3WfEfi9JFLwQeNbDSuX+8QX1wmH/aXCNuXhdleld+W25KY0gMBYuTbQrMybayp9 Lqqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705040032; x=1705644832; h=message-id:to:from:cc:in-reply-to:subject:date:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=612FaUtyWHrQgcfBp0FBDfndQtqCY0UtlrRZEx2qFTo=; b=MvOcFZBk6AoQ8Kwv01aJ4/l8GCpS4qE0vBoM/RrCArPGeUd8gtTHTEOgEEgMaWwjGT nuWep2y3/5pQgBv9s0c4FEiD2UFV0cCoxW1SAFM4/SIYlJkISTFUF1AgT7YYBzTJmpZE hTa51tjVQTmj1DXdNrjuYf168g6ID1KiJkgBTsAWd7ZlIVptYLJde/eXnhhPvNPmjo0q ikx0JbcPLxggXHhBEqaC/IPD8JU7PGiwgYkhS+CEnKkBF0NkOXQs194JjYSsISe+f4Tc 09C88x5kfNOdRprlxqTnI8zy1CZ4RV+Iw1GKjBn36V3BuYSz+c33jefgqXM17g0Ezzd+ fplg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzFPDN72fAlYIpyUFjFekIChyDn65Tw0Zrb9qlMXIecXT4x/7vo DgD4DChuL8ET9cBa5xINFqjmK63w4QuwSw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGB4NQI3yvjjhKdFbE1I33i7uJvA3FyNlwKI6Ae3ZDGfVwUywVX+ZnNFSr6tT8Inecfa2/vmw== X-Received: by 2002:a4a:c7:0:b0:594:6f:f6d6 with SMTP id 190-20020a4a00c7000000b00594006ff6d6mr254025ooh.8.1705040031593; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 22:13:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([192.184.165.199]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v8-20020a4aad88000000b00594ee4b4339sm527923oom.28.2024.01.11.22.13.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 11 Jan 2024 22:13:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 22:13:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 22:13:39 PST (-0800) Subject: Re: Happy New Year 2024 & Freeze for the upcoming glibc 2.39 release In-Reply-To: CC: Jeff Law , enh@google.com, dilfridge@gentoo.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, josmyers@redhat.com From: Palmer Dabbelt To: Carlos O'Donell Message-ID: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:10:11 PST (-0800), Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 12:33:51 PST (-0800), Jeff Law wrote: >> >> >> On 1/10/24 11:38, Carlos O'Donell wrote: >> >>>> >>>> (speaking not as a glibc maintainer [or even user!], but as someone >>>> who aims for source compatibility where possible...) what's the status >>>> of the riscv64 ifunc stuff? >>> >>> Adding Palmer and Jeff to TO: to see if we have an answer for this. >> My recollection (from Cauldron) was that we were still waiting on a >> final approval for the first ifunc'd mem* routine as Florian had raised >> some correctness questions. The idea was once Florian's correctness >> questions were resolved we could use the knowledge to stamp out the >> other routines that have implementations, but needed the right ifunc glue. >> >> I haven't had the time to follow glibc at all the last few months. So >> if there's been movement I wouldn't be aware of it. > > Evan has a patch set from this morning, I think it's ready to go. I'd > checked earlier this week too, but there were some comments. > > So I think we can just commit it, it's been a pretty long tail of small > stuff. We're both seeing some errors in build-many-glibcs, the compiler's build of glibc fails for i686-gnu and x86_64-gnu with msg-destroy.c: In function ‘__mach_msg_destroy’: msg-destroy.c:114:21: error: unknown type name ‘mach_port_name_inlined_t’; did you mean ‘mach_port_name_array_t’? 114 | mach_port_name_inlined_t *inlined_ports = (mach_port_name_inlined_t *)addr; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | mach_port_name_array_t msg-destroy.c:114:64: error: ‘mach_port_name_inlined_t’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘mach_port_name_array_t’? 114 | mach_port_name_inlined_t *inlined_ports = (mach_port_name_inlined_t *)addr; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | mach_port_name_array_t msg-destroy.c:114:64: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in msg-destroy.c:114:90: error: expected expression before ‘)’ token 114 | mach_port_name_inlined_t *inlined_ports = (mach_port_name_inlined_t *)addr; | ^ msg-destroy.c:116:63: error: request for member ‘name’ in something not a structure or union 116 | mach_msg_destroy_port(inlined_ports[i].name, name); | ^ I don't think that has anything to do with this patch set, but looks like it's different than what folks are seeing over here https://inbox.sourceware.org/libc-alpha/15a8d57-ccd6-7be5-8feb-7348dc2976f0@redhat.com/ Joseph pointed me to his test results on IRC https://inbox.sourceware.org/libc-testresults/170493450738.1404407.10772674444944760670@tor.usersys.redhat.com/T/#u and from reading that I think the problem might be that I have old gnumach/hurd versions. It looks like I have master from last November (probably when I setup my build-many-glibcs tree). commit ccde19525333c38360684385c09cebd95a7b631f (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) Author: Samuel Thibault Date: Tue Nov 7 00:24:54 2023 +0100 mach/message.h: Fix C++98 build static_assert was introduced in C++11. I'm trying another build with everything updated, hopefully that was the problem.