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 5A96DC10F1A for ; Tue, 7 May 2024 14:22:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id C37743CDCB6 for ; Tue, 7 May 2024 16:22:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (in-5.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D76833CDB74 for ; Tue, 7 May 2024 16:22:12 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: in-5.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=195.135.223.130; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (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-5.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BFC062D8E3 for ; Tue, 7 May 2024 16:22:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46E1B3402E; Tue, 7 May 2024 14:22:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A484913A2D; Tue, 7 May 2024 14:22:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([10.150.64.162]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id 6ZLWIxI5OmYkPQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Tue, 07 May 2024 14:22:10 +0000 Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 16:22:04 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Martin Doucha Message-ID: <20240507142204.GA138935@pevik> References: <20240430122208.13043-1-mdoucha@suse.cz> <20240430122208.13043-2-mdoucha@suse.cz> <20240506194156.GA38981@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46E1B3402E X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-5.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/9] KVM: Disable EBP register use in 32bit code 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > On 06. 05. 24 21:41, Petr Vorel wrote: > > > ifeq ($(HOST_CPU),x86) > > > - GUEST_CFLAGS += -m32 > > > + GUEST_CFLAGS += -m32 -ffixed-ebp > > FYI this will fail on 32 bit build on clang: > > clang: error: unknown argument: '-ffixed-ebp' > > I don't want to block this patchset which brings important test, but it'd be > > great to fix it. > > Is there clang equivalent? Or is it even needed for clang? > > Either way, we need to detect clang. I don't think simple > > ifeq ($(CXX),clang) > > would be enough, because cc can be alias to clang. > Hmm, I need to fix this. I guess that configure should just check for > -ffixed-ebp support. Yes, that would be ideal solution which I definitely don't want to force you. > Fortunately, clang doesn't generate code that would > trigger stack segment fault so the workaround is only needed for GCC. Great! > Could you review and merge the trivial patches (4, 5, 6, 7) so that I don't > need to resubmit everything? Sure! Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp