From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753075AbdDKSmg (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 14:42:36 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:32836 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751997AbdDKSmd (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 14:42:33 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 719A73D95D Authentication-Results: ext-mx06.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx06.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fweimer@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 719A73D95D Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 resend 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64 To: Yury Norov , Catalin Marinas References: <1488395968-14313-1-git-send-email-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> <20170410194740.GA28503@yury-N73SV> <20170411113334.GA27857@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20170411183636.GB5091@yury-N73SV> Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Pinski , Heiko Carstens , Chris Metcalf , philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com, Joseph Myers , zhouchengming1@huawei.com, Steve Ellcey , Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com, Andreas Schwab , agraf@suse.de, szabolcs.nagy@arm.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, Adam Borowski , manuel.montezelo@gmail.com, Chris Metcalf , Arnd Bergmann , Andrew Pinski , linyongting@huawei.com, klimov.linux@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, Bamvor Zhangjian , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Maxim Kuvyrkov , Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ramana Radhakrishnan , schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, davem@davemloft.net, christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com From: Florian Weimer Message-ID: <18edebeb-201e-a9d6-7e66-6e34f98a40df@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:42:24 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170411183636.GB5091@yury-N73SV> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:42:33 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/11/2017 08:36 PM, Yury Norov wrote: >> Also, the latest benchmarks I've seen were mostly for user space >> while I'm more concerned with the user-kernel interface >> (https://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=148690490713310&w=2). > >> On the glibc testing side, have the regressions been identified/fixed? > > I run LTP for testing the ABI and kernel, and there is no failures in > ltplite scenario. With glibc testsuite, there's only 3 failures > comparing to lp64. (Steve, fix me if something changed.) This is > slides on ilp32 from Linaro Connect, hope you'll find it useful. > > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1TKZqgH0XJUgMMGkw2fJA3Lzr57slht1sGKYJVBJTNM4/edit?usp=sharing The listed failures are: misc/tst-sync_file_range nptl/tst-stack4 malloc/tst-mallocstate If necessary, I will fix malloc/tst-mallocstate once there's support for a new architecture in build-many-glibcs.py. The failure is architecture-independent, it's related to the lack of a compat symbol and the difficulty of checking for that at the Makefile or test level. nptl/tst-stack4 is also a generic failure, I think. misc/tst-sync_file_range is probably a real failure related to argument passing. I think this system call was problematic on other architectures, too. Thanks, Florian (Sorry for the wide Cc: list despite the glibc content.) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: fweimer@redhat.com (Florian Weimer) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:42:24 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v7 resend 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64 In-Reply-To: <20170411183636.GB5091@yury-N73SV> References: <1488395968-14313-1-git-send-email-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> <20170410194740.GA28503@yury-N73SV> <20170411113334.GA27857@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20170411183636.GB5091@yury-N73SV> Message-ID: <18edebeb-201e-a9d6-7e66-6e34f98a40df@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 04/11/2017 08:36 PM, Yury Norov wrote: >> Also, the latest benchmarks I've seen were mostly for user space >> while I'm more concerned with the user-kernel interface >> (https://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=148690490713310&w=2). > >> On the glibc testing side, have the regressions been identified/fixed? > > I run LTP for testing the ABI and kernel, and there is no failures in > ltplite scenario. With glibc testsuite, there's only 3 failures > comparing to lp64. (Steve, fix me if something changed.) This is > slides on ilp32 from Linaro Connect, hope you'll find it useful. > > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1TKZqgH0XJUgMMGkw2fJA3Lzr57slht1sGKYJVBJTNM4/edit?usp=sharing The listed failures are: misc/tst-sync_file_range nptl/tst-stack4 malloc/tst-mallocstate If necessary, I will fix malloc/tst-mallocstate once there's support for a new architecture in build-many-glibcs.py. The failure is architecture-independent, it's related to the lack of a compat symbol and the difficulty of checking for that at the Makefile or test level. nptl/tst-stack4 is also a generic failure, I think. misc/tst-sync_file_range is probably a real failure related to argument passing. I think this system call was problematic on other architectures, too. Thanks, Florian (Sorry for the wide Cc: list despite the glibc content.)