From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 1wt.eu (ded1.1wt.eu [163.172.96.212]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA144202C3D; Sat, 22 Feb 2025 10:26:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=163.172.96.212 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740220000; cv=none; b=Hvz1pTDs0FtUcTYeGjtDAOmUqfgMmrZDFpfIKKwB9j83oh83SurnXdiMPs1jM4wSX9fSs1R2PlTnOMeM/CqXJbm6TrjQdPnorMqs4aThK11ppwmUQvgtbdhN69IQrUe+Bjsf1hJ1+kerIGVNleWcL4GR/liPR0zB34opcKlxMYY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740220000; c=relaxed/simple; bh=j5WzgqN4kOuCrsD8hHzHoKIHNrX5mXdR54X+4uHZzHU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=X3wBZw20zfPXcsM6l8WleDM8L9V5CcQEsvX063LIEawEa1VZbDCroGGyI1etcdWwS/yV8cWUp5b2MYjj89Dp6xLDNeGYn3TGF9b8aPG2XHmb5J3OlPOPoZdIpXPftddb9mFo8yUXQW2adKTlTsSuyDicMGuNQ4njToLKWjBg7TE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=163.172.96.212 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 51MAQQUb014866; Sat, 22 Feb 2025 11:26:26 +0100 Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 11:26:26 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wei=DFschuh?= Cc: Christophe Leroy , Kees Cook , Eric Biederman , Shuah Khan , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Bill Wendling , Justin Stitt , Andy Lutomirski , Thomas Gleixner , Vincenzo Frascino , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] selftests: vDSO: parse_vdso: Make compatible with nolibc Message-ID: <20250222102626.GB13708@1wt.eu> References: <20250203-parse_vdso-nolibc-v1-0-9cb6268d77be@linutronix.de> <20250203143640-70c59c53-af45-40cb-9a52-6395b3fdd263@linutronix.de> <937c99b3-3837-4510-be65-4eca3b280ce2@csgroup.eu> <20250203165859-8af1246b-6dd8-468a-8e05-68c7b0cad304@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20250203165859-8af1246b-6dd8-468a-8e05-68c7b0cad304@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 05:14:37PM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 04:43:22PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > > Do you have any plan to get it work with nolibc for all test programs in > > selftests/vDSO, not only the standalone x86 test ? > > Not directly as next step. I am focussing on some other work which will > integrate (vDSO) selftests with nolibc slightly differently. > However if you have interest in converting the tests now, that would be > great and will also be useful for my future changes. > The current issues I see: > * Missing architecture support in nolibc (should be fairly easy to implement) > * Missing kselftest_harness.h support in nolibc (I'm working on that) > * Maybe some users want to stick with their regular libc > (Nothing should prevent that, but the mechanism may need some discussion) BTW, I wanted to thank you for this work. Originally when I started with nolibc, I thought the vdso was out of reach due to the many missing definitions. Turns out you were braver than me ;-) Cheers, Willy