Re: [PATCH 1/7] x86/vdso: Respect COMPAT_32BIT_TIME

H. Peter Anvin
2026-03-03T21:53:45Z

On 2026-03-03 13:27, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> I see. I would argue here that a link failure is actually the best
> case then: the entire point of CONFIG_COMPAT_32BIT_TIME=n is to
> enforce the fail-early case, as opposed to silent data corruption
> after (now) 12 years of operation.
>
> I don't think there is an actual link failure here, as dl_vdso_vsym()
> resolves it at runtime by glibc (when using time32), while musl
> doesn't use __vdso_gettimeofday at all.
>

Well, the former is a link failure -- just one handled reasonably gracefully.
A library that really wants a fallback can presumably also avoid the problem
by provide a weak reference for the fallback.

-hpa