[PATCH v7 00/13] GLIBC LoongArch PATCHES

[Xi Ruoyao]

On Sun, 2022-07-24 at 17:49 +0800, WANG Xuerui wrote:

> Of these, the ifunc failures are "expected" by you, the 
> elf/check-abi-libc diff is trivial (maybe you just didn't rebase as 
> frequently):
> 
> --- ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/loongarch/lp64/libc.abilist 2022-07-23 
> 14:45:57.490029442 +0800
> +++ /home/xenon/src/glibc/build/libc.symlist    2022-07-24 
> 13:44:10.416642655 +0800
> @@ -496 +496 @@ GLIBC_2.36 _mcount F
> -GLIBC_2.36 _nl_default_dirname D 0x12
> +GLIBC_2.36 _nl_default_dirname D 0x17
> @@ -541,0 +542,3 @@ GLIBC_2.36 alphasort64 F
> +GLIBC_2.36 arc4random F
> +GLIBC_2.36 arc4random_buf F
> +GLIBC_2.36 arc4random_uniform F

arc4random is just merged two days ago.

> The others may need some love. Of course they're possibly because of my 
> particular environment (Gentoo is a little bit different than "ordinary" 
> distros like Debian/Fedora, and I already have to symlink the 
> libgcc_s.so and libstdc++.so to pass the nptl tests at all)

I can tell tst-nss-files-hosts-long is most likely PR24816.  For the
others I'm not sure.

By "symlink libgcc_s.so and libstdc++.so" I guess you are running tests
in a temporary system ("Gentoo stage 1" IIRC).  In LFS we also get some
additional test failures in the temporary system [1] so it's better to
rerun the tests in a full system.

(In earlier LFS releases we also needed to symlink libgcc_s.so and
libstdc++.so for glibc tests, but it's no longer needed now thanks to a
major refactoring [2].)

[1]: https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/systemd/chapter08/glibc.html
[2]: https://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/sympa/arc/lfs-dev/2020-05/msg00000.html

My test result on LFS (fully built) with a patched ld seems clean.  The
patch is originally published at
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2022-July/121852.html, but
it's in a large series introducing new relocation types.  I managed to
rebased and adjusted the patch so it can be applied individually for
binutils-gdb master branch.  The patch is attached in this mail.

+Zhensong: is there any possibility to merge this patch for binutils
master and 2.39 release branch (including 2.38 release branch would be
even better) so at least glibc ifunc tests will be happy?

XPASS: conform/UNIX98/ndbm.h/linknamespace
XPASS: conform/XOPEN2K/ndbm.h/linknamespace
XPASS: conform/XOPEN2K8/ndbm.h/linknamespace
XPASS: conform/XPG42/ndbm.h/linknamespace
UNSUPPORTED: crypt/cert
FAIL: elf/check-abi-libc
UNSUPPORTED: elf/tst-env-setuid
UNSUPPORTED: elf/tst-env-setuid-tunables
XPASS: elf/tst-protected1a
XPASS: elf/tst-protected1b
UNSUPPORTED: elf/tst-valgrind-smoke
UNSUPPORTED: misc/tst-adjtimex
UNSUPPORTED: misc/tst-clock_adjtime
UNSUPPORTED: misc/tst-ntp_adjtime
UNSUPPORTED: misc/tst-pkey
UNSUPPORTED: misc/tst-rseq
UNSUPPORTED: misc/tst-rseq-disable
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/test-cond-printers
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/test-condattr-printers
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/test-mutex-printers
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/test-mutexattr-printers
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/test-rwlock-printers
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/test-rwlockattr-printers
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/tst-pthread-gdb-attach
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/tst-pthread-gdb-attach-static
UNSUPPORTED: nptl/tst-rseq-nptl
UNSUPPORTED: stdlib/tst-secure-getenv
UNSUPPORTED: time/tst-clock_settime
UNSUPPORTED: time/tst-settimeofday
Summary of test results:
      1 FAIL
   4576 PASS
     22 UNSUPPORTED
     12 XFAIL
      6 XPASS


-- 
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: binutils-loongarch-ifunc.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 14154 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20220724/bfdbb032/attachment-0001.bin>