Re: glibc 2.27: less than two weeks till release

[Romain Naour <romain dot naour at gmail dot com>]

Hi,

Le 18/01/2018 à 18:56, Dmitry V. Levin a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
> We have less than two weeks till the planned release date.  By this date
> in the freeze calendar we should have been ready to start architecture
> testing for 2.27, but, unfortunately, with pending complicated patches
> that affect all architectures we cannot really start the testing until
> these patches have either been accepted or postponed to 2.28.
> Nevertheless, architecture maintainers are encouraged to do preliminary
> testing.

I did a preliminary build test with current glibc master
(glibc-2.26.9000-1140-g4612268a0ad8e3409d8ce2314dd2dd8ee0af5269) for several
architecture using gcc 7.2, binutils 2.29.1 and kernel headers 4.9.

I would like report some build issue here before the release.

1) microblaze (glibc):
glibc-glibc-2.26.9000-1140-g4612268a0ad8e3409d8ce2314dd2dd8ee0af5269/build/io/xstatconv.o
../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/copy_file_range.c: In function 'copy_file_range':
../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/copy_file_range.c:44:10: error: implicit declaration
of function 'copy_file_range_compat'; did you mean 'copy_file_range'?
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
   return copy_file_range_compat (infd, pinoff, outfd, poutoff, length, flags);
          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          copy_file_range
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

Seems a copy paste error introduced by:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=bad7a0c81f501fbbcc79af9eaa4b8254441c4a1f

2) aarch64 (gcc):

libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc:1265:35: error: ‘struct
mcontext_t’ has no member named ‘__reserved’; did you mean ‘__glibc_reserved1’?
   u8 *aux = ucontext->uc_mcontext.__reserved;
                                   ^~~~~~~~~~
                                   __glibc_reserved1

Build issue introduced by:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=4fa9b3bfe6759c82beb4b043a54a3598ca467289

	* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/aarch64/ucontext_i.sym (oEXTENSION): Use
	__glibc_reserved1 instead of __reserved.

Even with the current gcc master, we can't build an aarch64 toolchain with the
upcoming glibc 2.27 since ucontext->uc_mcontext.__reserved is still used.

Best regards,
Romain

> 
> Here is a recap of pending issues.
> 
> * Release blockers listed in the release page[1]:
> 
> ** Reported failure on Intel hardware involving steam/mono runtimes[2],
> likely a regression caused by recent setjmp changes[3].
> 
> There is going to be an ABI change if we have to revert these changes,
> hampering the pre-release testing.
> H.J., is there any progress with this?
> 
> ** Month names in alternative grammatical case[4]
> 
> This has already been reviewed by Carlos.
> Rafal, is there anything that has to be done before these series is committed?
> 
> ** Review / update collation data from Unicode / ISO 14651[5]
> 
> Given that the bug is almost 6 year old and no patch has been submitted
> for review yet, does it have any chance for a review and a proper testing
> before the release?
> Mike, why do you consider this change as a blocker for 2.27?
> 
> * Features listed as desirable in the release page:
> 
> ** C11 threads[6]
> 
> This has been waiting for review for many weeks, last week Carlos said
> he will review this.
> It's unfortunate that we still have complicated all-arch patch series
> like this still pending review for 2.27.
> 
> ** Istvan Kurucsai's malloc security patches[7]
> 
> This series has been under review for many weeks.
> Florian, is it still targeted for 2.27?
> 
> ** RISC-V port v4[8]
> 
> There is a separate summary[9] on this topic.
> 
> ** Don't include libio.h from the installed stdio.h[10]
> 
> This is still pending review for 2.27.
> Florian, anyone else, is there any progress with this?
> 
> [1] https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.27
> [2] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-01/msg00178.html
> [3] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-01/msg00268.html
> [4] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-01/msg00258.html
> [5] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14095
> [6] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2017-09/msg00871.html
> [7] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2017-11/msg00229.html
> [8] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-01/msg00475.html
> [9] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-01/msg00379.html
> [10] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-01/msg00248.html
> 
>