From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Cc: Benjamin Copeland <ben.copeland@linaro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
LTP List <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] LTP: list of failures on 32bit and compat mode
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 00:08:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230411220811.GA1798729@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+G9fYs461=iJqZqKe8_iRkfsMemSSA+ByOPRc9k-kBf4Hp8og@mail.gmail.com>
> On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 at 16:26, Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 6, 2023, at 11:11, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > > > Following LTP syscalls failed on the i386 and arm environments with
> > > > Linux next / mainline kernels. The userspace is coming from Open
> > > > Embedded kirkstone.
> > > Thanks for the report and summary! I went through the list and found
> > > that most if not all of the bugs looks like incompatibilities
> > > with musl, not with 32-bit. It's probably not well tested with
> > > musl.
> > > Can you try again with glibc and see if there are any remaining
> > > issues then? LTP should probably be fixed to work with both, but
> > > if nobody has done that so far, it's likely that this has come
> > > up in the past but ran into problems upstreaming the fixes.
> > > > Anyone seeing this problem on 32-bit i386 or arm ?
> > > > You get to see "segfault" in the following logs that have been noticed
> > > > on i386 only.
> > > > This is not a new problem. We have been noticing these failures for a
> > > > really long time.
> > > > Would it be worth investigating the reason for failures on 32bit architectures ?
> > > > Test logs,
> > > > -----
> > > > [ 0.000000] Linux version 6.3.0-rc5-next-20230406 (tuxmake@tuxmake)
> > > > (i686-linux-gnu-gcc (Debian 11.3.0-11) 11.3.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils
> > > > for Debian) 2.40) #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC @1680759389
> > > > Test environment: i386
> > > > Suite: ltp-syscalls
> > > > Toolchain: gcc-11
> > > > fstatfs02
> > > > fstatfs02 1 TPASS : expected failure - errno = 9 : Bad file descriptor
> > > > fstatfs02 2 TBROK : tst_sig.c:232: unexpected signal SIGSEGV(11)
> > > > received (pid = 17841).
> > > > fstatfs02 3 TBROK : tst_sig.c:232: Remaining cases broken
> > This is IMHO using the old LTP API.
> > testcases/kernel/syscalls/fstatfs/fstatfs02.c was converted to new LTP API in
> > 5a8f89d35 ("syscalls/statfs02, fstatfs02: Convert to new API"), which was
> > released in 20220930. There is already newer release 20230127.
> > Generally it's safer to test mainline kernel with LTP master,
> > but this fix has already been in the latest LTP release 20230127.
> > And this error has been later fixed with
> > 492542072 ("syscalls/statfs02, fstatfs02: Accept segfault instead of EFAULT")
I'm sorry, I was wrong stating that unexpected signal SIGSEGV(11)
error was fixed by 492542072.
> Thanks for insite about the failed test investigations.
> > @Naresh which LTP do you use for testing? It must be some older LTP :(.
> Our build system started running LTP version 20230127.
I'm sorry, I obviously misinterpreted the test output as old LTP code.
> I will keep you posted with the latest findings.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
Petr
> - Naresh
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-11 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-06 9:11 [LTP] LTP: list of failures on 32bit and compat mode Naresh Kamboju
2023-04-06 9:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-04-06 10:56 ` Petr Vorel
2023-04-06 11:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-04-06 12:48 ` Petr Vorel
2023-04-06 12:53 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-04-06 13:17 ` Petr Vorel
2023-04-06 13:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-04-06 13:58 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-04-11 16:45 ` Naresh Kamboju
2023-04-11 17:37 ` Naresh Kamboju
2023-04-11 22:08 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2023-04-12 5:22 ` Daniel Díaz
2023-04-12 7:14 ` Petr Vorel
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=20230411220811.GA1798729@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=ben.copeland@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).