From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79541CD4F35 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 09:03:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D1F33CE365 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 11:03:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-3.smtp.seeweb.it (in-3.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDB673CA3A6 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 11:03:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-3.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9566C1BB9C39 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 11:03:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6BE5211BD; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 09:03:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1695373424; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qMyJqhA+p6Hi3QaeCdJXgnr97pBqlm6Ek+gnfpSGM1g=; b=kZsh7yFEqS1lKEr9IrOkjnjbsS1qeYE3A2oXdXoQ/6Qq1XGQGdVX3G5c7gcsZ5VlDu6DrK mhL9apfgguUQxbK5C8PDmKLoZS0VkPDxCdR1eYZLFWjWqNBFpU1ZIyIL7+zmAFzfHAuHYt k/tM+baqKAll6/OJSCbj7M8PzY/Nh+s= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1695373424; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qMyJqhA+p6Hi3QaeCdJXgnr97pBqlm6Ek+gnfpSGM1g=; b=HfyTZjUip9Dlzw1AB6kmDKi1Wc24O/cfTQVa2AHLQ+OMkRtzUzzEchsqfI3rnJyfDCLDCi CClSQvZm9xiH9QAA== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B96B413597; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 09:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id aSLJK3BYDWWDTwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 22 Sep 2023 09:03:44 +0000 Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 11:03:43 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Richard Palethorpe Message-ID: <20230922090343.GA483490@pevik> References: <20230919083827.8423-1-rpalethorpe@suse.com> <8734z6fvy1.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8734z6fvy1.fsf@suse.de> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.1 at in-3.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] kvm: Fix Nix build failure by moving -fno-stack-protector to CFLAGS X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it, Fabrice Fontaine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > Hello, > Petr Vorel writes: > > Hi all, > > [I Cc Fabrice and Buildroot ML] > > On Tue, 19 Sept 2023 at 14:51, Martin Doucha wrote: > >> Hi, > >> pvorel should have a look whether it doesn't break the other systems > >> where -fno-stack-protector is needed, but otherwise: > > Yesterday night I tested the current LTP master with ./utils/test-pkg. Some > > Bootlin toolchains keep failing (bootlin-x86-64-musl, bootlin-x86-64-glibc): > > CC testcases/kernel/kvm/lib_x86.o > > gbr-test-pkg/bootlin-x86-64-musl/host/opt/ext-toolchain/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-buildroot-linux-musl/11.3.0/../../../../x86_64-buildroot-linux-musl/bin/ld: > > lib_x86.o: in function `kvm_init_guest_vmcb': > > lib_x86.c:(.text+0x7c8): undefined reference to `__stack_chk_fail' > > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > > Problems are only on x86_64, other archs (aarch64, riscv64, mipsel, amv7r) > > are OK. > I think only x86_64 is supported. Yes (+ i386). Thanks, I forgot on it. > > NOTE: In Buildroot LTP is currently disabled when musl is used due 5.11 > > headers requirement for musl toolchain [1], but I temporarily remove this > > requirement to get more testing. That's why there are also musl results. > > It looks like this patch actually fixes it, thus: > > Acked-by: Petr Vorel > Right, it's not just Nix then. I will merge it. +1 > > There are even more kvm test related results [2], but I suspect they are more > > related to the Buildroot toolchain than LTP itself: > > CC testcases/kernel/kvm/lib_guest.o > > bootstrap_x86_64.S: Assembler messages: > > bootstrap_x86_64.S:16: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.code16' > > bootstrap_x86_64.S:19: Error: unknown mnemonic `cli' -- `cli' > > bootstrap_x86_64.S:21: Error: unknown mnemonic `lgdt' -- `lgdt kvm_gdt32_desc' > > bootstrap_x86_64.S:23: Error: operand 1 must be an integer register -- > > `mov $0x11,%eax' > > bootstrap_x86_64.S:24: Error: operand 1 must be an integer register -- > > `mov %eax,%cr0' > > bootstrap_x86_64.S:26: Error: unknown mnemonic `jmp' -- `jmp > > $3*8,$protected_mode_entry' > > bootstrap_x86_64.S:28: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.code32' > For me I would at the least we need V=1 enabled or the names and > versions of the tools being used to guess what is wrong here. I'm not sure if I find some spare time in my after-work time. If yes, I'll post logs. Kind regards, Petr > mov $0x11,%eax looks like a really simple op to put 11 in EAX using > AT&T/GAS syntax. If that goes wrong then possibly the wrong syntax is > expected by the assembler or else a previous line is confusing it. -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp