This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc 2.31: hard freeze on Friday, 31st Jan
On 31/01/2020 09:12, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Adhemerval Zanella:
>
>> Based on the extended asm and local register variable usage with GCC on
>> the 'powerpc Linux scv support and scv system call ABI proposal' I think
>> we hit a nasty latent sparc issue I am seeing at least on sparc32 tests
>> (it clobbers the syscalls result and make some calls to clock_nanosleep
>> to not act as a cancellation entrypoint).
>>
>> I am working on a solution, do you think we should push it after the
>> release branch is created or can we hold a day or two?
>
> I expect it will take considerable time for the GCC developers to agree
> on the actual semantics of local register variables. I do not think we
> should hold the glibc release for it. We can backport fixes as needed.
I am seeing intermittent failures on some cancellation tests as reported
on wiki:
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancel18
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancel22
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancel23
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancel4
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancel5
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancel7
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancelx18
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancelx4
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancelx5
FAIL: nptl/tst-cancelx7
And based on the thread I do think we are doing some not fully supported
on sparc that we can mitigate with more concise syscall code. In any case
if you think this is not worth, we can backport it for sure.