From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Make compatible with nolibc
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 11:24:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250222102426.GA13708@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250203-parse_vdso-nolibc-v1-13-9cb6268d77be@linutronix.de>
On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 10:05:14AM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> nolibc does not provide this header, instead its definitions are
> available unconditionally.
Please think about reminding which one you're talking about so that a
simple "git log" shows what header you're talking about (limits.h)
without requiring to also see the patch itself.
BTW, I think that limits.h is common enough that we could probably
provide it as well with nolibc to ease porting (and the current patch
is a good example of this). Maybe it could simply start by including
stdint.h to provide the various limits we rely on. I remember that in
the early days of nolibc-test we had to exclude it as well for nolibc.
What do you think? The less we need to patch programs to insert #ifndef
NOLIBC, the better.
Cheers,
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-22 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-03 9:05 [PATCH 00/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Make compatible with nolibc Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 01/16] MAINTAINERS: Add vDSO selftests Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 02/16] elf, uapi: Add definition for STN_UNDEF Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-04 15:32 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 03/16] elf, uapi: Add definition for DT_GNU_HASH Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-04 15:32 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 04/16] elf, uapi: Add definitions for VER_FLG_BASE and VER_FLG_WEAK Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-04 15:10 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-04 15:17 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-04 15:32 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-04 15:33 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 05/16] elf, uapi: Add type ElfXX_Versym Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-04 15:32 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 06/16] elf, uapi: Add types ElfXX_Verdef and ElfXX_Veraux Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-04 15:33 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 07/16] tools/include: Add uapi/linux/elf.h Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 08/16] selftests: Add headers target Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 09/16] selftests: vDSO: vdso_standalone_test_x86: Use vdso_init_form_sysinfo_ehdr Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 10/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Drop vdso_init_from_auxv() Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 11/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Use UAPI headers instead of libc headers Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 12/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Test __SIZEOF_LONG__ instead of ULONG_MAX Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 13/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Make compatible with nolibc Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-22 10:24 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2025-02-24 14:41 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 14/16] selftests: vDSO: vdso_test_gettimeofday: Clean up includes Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 15/16] selftests: vDSO: vdso_test_gettimeofday: Make compatible with nolibc Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 16/16] selftests: vDSO: vdso_standalone_test_x86: Switch to nolibc Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 11:23 ` [PATCH 00/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Make compatible with nolibc Christophe Leroy
2025-02-03 13:50 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-03 15:43 ` Christophe Leroy
2025-02-03 16:14 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-22 10:26 ` Willy Tarreau
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250222102426.GA13708@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.