On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 09:23:35AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Friday 19 February 2016 01:35:06 Yury Norov wrote:

quoted

Hi Bamvor, everybody,

I have new glibc that follows new ABI:
https://github.com/norov/glibc/tree/new-api

Ah, very good!

quoted

It's very draft and dirty, but you can try it with RFC5.
My fail list for ltplite looks like this:
pipeio_4                       FAIL       11   
abort01                        FAIL       2    
clone02                        FAIL       4    
kill10                         FAIL       2    
kill11                         FAIL       2    
lstat01A                       FAIL       1    
lstat02                        FAIL       1    
mmap16                         FAIL       6    
nanosleep03                    FAIL       1    
nftw01                         FAIL       1    
nftw6401                       FAIL       1    
open12                         FAIL       2    
pathconf01                     FAIL       1    
pipe07                         FAIL       2    
profil01                       FAIL       11   
readdir01                      FAIL       1    
readlink01A                    FAIL       1    
rename11                       FAIL       2    
rmdir02                        FAIL       2    
sigaltstack01                  FAIL       1    
sigaltstack02                  FAIL       1    
stat03                         FAIL       1    
stat04                         FAIL       1    
stat06                         FAIL       1    
umount2_01                     FAIL       2    
umount2_02                     FAIL       2    
umount2_03                     FAIL       2    
utime06                        FAIL       2    
writev01                       FAIL       1    
mtest06                        FAIL       11   
rwtest01                       FAIL       2    
rwtest02                       FAIL       2    
rwtest03                       FAIL       2    
rwtest04                       FAIL       2    
rwtest05                       FAIL       2

I have no idea whether this is good news or bad news ;-)

In https://github.com/norov/glibc/commit/351b8728fdb365bd4852ac113601ddf38153fdfc
I see that you are passing __IPC_64, I thought we had already resolved
that in the kernel. We might need to go back to this.

I'm still on 4.4 kernel. So I need it. I'll drop __IPC_64 if unneeded on
rebase. Usually I rebase on rc5 or rc6.

In https://github.com/norov/glibc/commit/5d4290435e428267171ece871539b76e1d079d11
you are defining a struct __kernel_stat64 in the glibc. Is this the expected
way to do it? I would have thought you'd get the definition from the kernel
headers.
 
	Arnd

Almost all ports define its own struct kernel_stat / kernel_stat64.
in "kernel_header.h" See mips, spark, alpha, i386... Some also define
function xstat_conv or similar. With all that defined, it's expected
that one of generic xstat wrappers will work properly. I tried all,
and noone got working, so I wrote this hack to make it work somehow. 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel