[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Kurt Van Dijck]

nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads

Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
---
 package/nilfs-utils/Config.in | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
index 0c6b7a0..9dda27c 100644
--- a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
+++ b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 config BR2_PACKAGE_NILFS_UTILS
 	bool "nilfs-utils"
 	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS # sem_open()
+	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
 	depends on BR2_USE_MMU # util-linux libmount, libblkid
 	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBUUID
 	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBBLKID
-- 
1.8.5.rc3

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] nilfs-utils: fix build with static toolchains

[Kurt Van Dijck]

This commit adds a patch to respect the dependency libmount->libblkid->libuuid
properly in autoconf. This becomes necessary for static builds.

Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
---
 ...e-PKG_CHECK_MODULES-for-libmount-and-libb.patch | 139 +++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 139 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 package/nilfs-utils/0004-autoconf-use-PKG_CHECK_MODULES-for-libmount-and-libb.patch

diff --git a/package/nilfs-utils/0004-autoconf-use-PKG_CHECK_MODULES-for-libmount-and-libb.patch b/package/nilfs-utils/0004-autoconf-use-PKG_CHECK_MODULES-for-libmount-and-libb.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ec4d43
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/nilfs-utils/0004-autoconf-use-PKG_CHECK_MODULES-for-libmount-and-libb.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
+From b98acc19604c9cfd473a2932cc69c1e0a6493ae1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
+Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 09:47:45 +0100
+Subject: [PATCH] autoconf: use PKG_CHECK_MODULES for libmount and libblkid
+
+The dependencies of libmount to libblkid and libblkid to libuuid
+were not handled correctly, and only work for the shared object scenario.
+This commit switches the autoconfiguration to use PKG_CHECK_MODULES
+which handles the static vs. dynamic case.
+This commit has been compile-tested using buildroot on different compilers,
+including static & dynamic ones
+
+Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
+---
+ configure.ac                 | 9 ++-------
+ sbin/mkfs/Makefile.am        | 4 ++--
+ sbin/mkfs/mkfs.c             | 6 +++---
+ sbin/mount/Makefile.am       | 4 ++--
+ sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c  | 4 +---
+ sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c | 2 --
+ 6 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
+index 6fa8c41..83f52eb 100644
+--- a/configure.ac
++++ b/configure.ac
+@@ -104,13 +104,11 @@ AC_CHECK_HEADERS([ctype.h err.h fcntl.h grp.h libintl.h limits.h \
+ 
+ # Check for conditional libraries and headers.
+ if test "${with_libmount}" = "yes"; then
+-   AC_CHECK_LIB(mount, mnt_context_do_mount, [LIB_MOUNT="-lmount"],
++   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([MOUNT], [mount],,
+    	AC_MSG_ERROR([Mount library is enabled but libmount not found]))
+-   AC_CHECK_HEADERS([libmount/libmount.h])
+    with_selinux=no
+ fi
+ AM_CONDITIONAL(CONFIG_LIBMOUNT, [test "$with_libmount" = "yes"])
+-AC_SUBST(LIB_MOUNT)
+ 
+ if test "${with_selinux}" = "yes"; then
+    AC_CHECK_LIB(selinux, getprevcon,
+@@ -125,15 +123,12 @@ fi
+ AC_SUBST([LIB_SELINUX])
+ 
+ if test "${with_blkid}" = "yes"; then
+-   AC_CHECK_LIB(blkid, blkid_new_probe_from_filename,
++   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([BLKID], [blkid],
+    		[AC_DEFINE(HAVE_LIBBLKID, 1,
+ 		    [Define to 1 if you have the 'blkid' library (-lblkid).])
+-		 LIB_BLKID="-lblkid"
+ 		],
+ 		AC_MSG_ERROR([BLKID library not found]))
+-   AC_CHECK_HEADERS([blkid/blkid.h])
+ fi
+-AC_SUBST(LIB_BLKID)
+ 
+ # Checks for typedefs, structures, and compiler characteristics.
+ AC_C_CONST
+diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/Makefile.am b/sbin/mkfs/Makefile.am
+index 28f5128..408c976 100644
+--- a/sbin/mkfs/Makefile.am
++++ b/sbin/mkfs/Makefile.am
+@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
+ ## Makefile.am
+ 
+-AM_CFLAGS = -Wall
++AM_CFLAGS = -Wall $(BLKID_CFLAGS)
+ AM_CPPFLAGS = -I$(top_srcdir)/include
+-LDADD = -luuid $(LIB_BLKID) $(top_builddir)/lib/libnilfsfeature.la \
++LDADD = -luuid $(BLKID_LIBS) $(top_builddir)/lib/libnilfsfeature.la \
+ 	$(top_builddir)/lib/libmountchk.la \
+ 	$(top_builddir)/lib/libcrc32.la
+ 
+diff --git a/sbin/mkfs/mkfs.c b/sbin/mkfs/mkfs.c
+index d7f161e..0c45d6a 100644
+--- a/sbin/mkfs/mkfs.c
++++ b/sbin/mkfs/mkfs.c
+@@ -66,9 +66,9 @@
+ 
+ #include <errno.h>
+ 
+-#if HAVE_BLKID_BLKID_H
+-#include <blkid/blkid.h>
+-#endif	/* HAVE_BLKID_BLKID_H */
++#if HAVE_LIBBLKID
++#include <blkid.h>
++#endif	/* HAVE_LIBBLKID */
+ 
+ #include "nilfs.h"
+ #include "util.h"
+diff --git a/sbin/mount/Makefile.am b/sbin/mount/Makefile.am
+index f5d3c27..9554aa5 100644
+--- a/sbin/mount/Makefile.am
++++ b/sbin/mount/Makefile.am
+@@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ COMMONHEADERS = mount.nilfs2.h sundries.h xmalloc.h
+ LEGACYSOURCES = fstab.c mount_mntent.c mount_opts.c
+ LEGACYHEADERS = fstab.h mount_constants.h mount_mntent.h mount_opts.h
+ 
+-AM_CFLAGS = -Wall
++AM_CFLAGS = -Wall $(MOUNT_CFLAGS)
+ AM_CPPFLAGS = -I$(top_srcdir)/include
+ LDADD = $(top_builddir)/lib/librealpath.la \
+-	$(top_builddir)/lib/libcleanerexec.la $(LIB_MOUNT) $(LIB_SELINUX) \
++	$(top_builddir)/lib/libcleanerexec.la $(MOUNT_LIBS) $(LIB_SELINUX) \
+ 	$(LIB_POSIX_TIMER)
+ 
+ root_sbin_PROGRAMS = mount.nilfs2 umount.nilfs2
+diff --git a/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c b/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
+index ef40e68..a7fec00 100644
+--- a/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
++++ b/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
+@@ -67,9 +67,7 @@
+ #include <syslog.h>
+ #endif	/* HAVE_SYSLOG_H */
+ 
+-#if HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H
+-#include <libmount/libmount.h>
+-#endif	/* HAVE_LIBMOUNT_H */
++#include <libmount.h>
+ 
+ #include <stdarg.h>
+ #include <errno.h>
+diff --git a/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c b/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
+index ae5a337..2987f5d 100644
+--- a/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
++++ b/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
+@@ -59,9 +59,7 @@
+ #include <syslog.h>
+ #endif	/* HAVE_SYSLOG_H */
+ 
+-#if HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H
+ #include <libmount/libmount.h>
+-#endif	/* HAVE_LIBMOUNT_H */
+ 
+ #include <stdarg.h>
+ #include <errno.h>
+-- 
+1.8.5.rc3
+
-- 
1.8.5.rc3

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] nilfs-utils: fix build with static toolchains

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Thu,  4 Jan 2018 11:10:52 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> This commit adds a patch to respect the dependency libmount->libblkid->libuuid
> properly in autoconf. This becomes necessary for static builds.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>

Thanks for working on this! It looks a lot better. I have a few
minor/comments, see below.

Also, could you submit this patch upstream?

> + # Check for conditional libraries and headers.
> + if test "${with_libmount}" = "yes"; then
> +-   AC_CHECK_LIB(mount, mnt_context_do_mount, [LIB_MOUNT="-lmount"],
> ++   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([MOUNT], [mount],,
> +    	AC_MSG_ERROR([Mount library is enabled but libmount not found]))

I believe you could drop entirely the AC_MSG_ERROR() message here.
PKG_CHECK_MODULES([MOUNT], [mount]) already aborts with an error
message if the "mount" pkg-config description cannot be found.

> + if test "${with_selinux}" = "yes"; then
> +    AC_CHECK_LIB(selinux, getprevcon,
> +@@ -125,15 +123,12 @@ fi
> + AC_SUBST([LIB_SELINUX])
> + 
> + if test "${with_blkid}" = "yes"; then
> +-   AC_CHECK_LIB(blkid, blkid_new_probe_from_filename,
> ++   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([BLKID], [blkid],
> +    		[AC_DEFINE(HAVE_LIBBLKID, 1,
> + 		    [Define to 1 if you have the 'blkid' library (-lblkid).])
> +-		 LIB_BLKID="-lblkid"
> + 		],
> + 		AC_MSG_ERROR([BLKID library not found]))

Ditto here.

> +diff --git a/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c b/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
> +index ef40e68..a7fec00 100644
> +--- a/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
> ++++ b/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
> +@@ -67,9 +67,7 @@
> + #include <syslog.h>
> + #endif	/* HAVE_SYSLOG_H */
> + 
> +-#if HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H
> +-#include <libmount/libmount.h>
> +-#endif	/* HAVE_LIBMOUNT_H */
> ++#include <libmount.h>

So you're dropping the HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H condition because this
file is anyway only built when libmount support is enabled. Correct ?

> +diff --git a/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c b/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
> +index ae5a337..2987f5d 100644
> +--- a/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
> ++++ b/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
> +@@ -59,9 +59,7 @@
> + #include <syslog.h>
> + #endif	/* HAVE_SYSLOG_H */
> + 
> +-#if HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H
> + #include <libmount/libmount.h>
> +-#endif	/* HAVE_LIBMOUNT_H */

In the previous file, you change <libmount/libmount.h> to <libmount.h>,
but not here. Why?

Could you fix those minor issues and send an updated version?

Thanks a lot!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] nilfs-utils: fix build with static toolchains

[Kurt Van Dijck]

> Hello,
> 
> On Thu,  4 Jan 2018 11:10:52 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > This commit adds a patch to respect the dependency libmount->libblkid->libuuid
> > properly in autoconf. This becomes necessary for static builds.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
> 
> Thanks for working on this! It looks a lot better. I have a few
> minor/comments, see below.
> 
> Also, could you submit this patch upstream?

Yep, that was my intent.
But I'd rather wait for the patch to be complete, consistent, stable,
so I'd wait for all your comments, and the results of the build
server...

> 
> > + # Check for conditional libraries and headers.
> > + if test "${with_libmount}" = "yes"; then
> > +-   AC_CHECK_LIB(mount, mnt_context_do_mount, [LIB_MOUNT="-lmount"],
> > ++   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([MOUNT], [mount],,
> > +    	AC_MSG_ERROR([Mount library is enabled but libmount not found]))
> 
> I believe you could drop entirely the AC_MSG_ERROR() message here.
> PKG_CHECK_MODULES([MOUNT], [mount]) already aborts with an error
> message if the "mount" pkg-config description cannot be found.

I see. I wasn't aware of that.
I'll adapt.
> 
> > + if test "${with_selinux}" = "yes"; then
> > +    AC_CHECK_LIB(selinux, getprevcon,
> > +@@ -125,15 +123,12 @@ fi
> > + AC_SUBST([LIB_SELINUX])
> > + 
> > + if test "${with_blkid}" = "yes"; then
> > +-   AC_CHECK_LIB(blkid, blkid_new_probe_from_filename,
> > ++   PKG_CHECK_MODULES([BLKID], [blkid],
> > +    		[AC_DEFINE(HAVE_LIBBLKID, 1,
> > + 		    [Define to 1 if you have the 'blkid' library (-lblkid).])
> > +-		 LIB_BLKID="-lblkid"
> > + 		],
> > + 		AC_MSG_ERROR([BLKID library not found]))
> 
> Ditto here.
> 
> > +diff --git a/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c b/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
> > +index ef40e68..a7fec00 100644
> > +--- a/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
> > ++++ b/sbin/mount/mount_libmount.c
> > +@@ -67,9 +67,7 @@
> > + #include <syslog.h>
> > + #endif	/* HAVE_SYSLOG_H */
> > + 
> > +-#if HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H
> > +-#include <libmount/libmount.h>
> > +-#endif	/* HAVE_LIBMOUNT_H */
> > ++#include <libmount.h>
> 
> So you're dropping the HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H condition because this
> file is anyway only built when libmount support is enabled. Correct ?

Yep, that's the idea. Makefile.am reveals this.

> 
> > +diff --git a/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c b/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
> > +index ae5a337..2987f5d 100644
> > +--- a/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
> > ++++ b/sbin/mount/umount_libmount.c
> > +@@ -59,9 +59,7 @@
> > + #include <syslog.h>
> > + #endif	/* HAVE_SYSLOG_H */
> > + 
> > +-#if HAVE_LIBMOUNT_LIBMOUNT_H
> > + #include <libmount/libmount.h>
> > +-#endif	/* HAVE_LIBMOUNT_H */
> 
> In the previous file, you change <libmount/libmount.h> to <libmount.h>,
> but not here. Why?

I changed to <libmount.h> because pkgconfig add -I/path/to/libmount
anyway. I didn't repeat that here because ... I forgot.

> 
> Could you fix those minor issues and send an updated version?

Yep. on my todo list.
Kurt

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Kurt,

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:10:51AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads

What is your indication that this is the case? In the uClibc-ng config 
UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is selected by both linuxthreads and NPTL. When 
UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is enabled, UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME is also enabled 
by default. UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME provides clock_nanosleep().

> Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
> ---
>  package/nilfs-utils/Config.in | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> index 0c6b7a0..9dda27c 100644
> --- a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> +++ b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>  config BR2_PACKAGE_NILFS_UTILS
>  	bool "nilfs-utils"
>  	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS # sem_open()
> +	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()

NPTL implies threads support, so the NPTL dependency alone is enough.

You also need to update the comment.

>  	depends on BR2_USE_MMU # util-linux libmount, libblkid
>  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBUUID
>  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBBLKID

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 12:19:27 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:10:51AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads  
> 
> What is your indication that this is the case? In the uClibc-ng config 
> UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is selected by both linuxthreads and NPTL. When 
> UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is enabled, UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME is also enabled 
> by default. UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME provides clock_nanosleep().

I haven't looked at it in detail, but:

package/blktrace/Config.in:     depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
package/can-utils/Config.in:    depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
package/dvblast/Config.in:      depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Thomas,

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:33:36AM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 12:19:27 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:10:51AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > > nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads  
> > 
> > What is your indication that this is the case? In the uClibc-ng config 
> > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is selected by both linuxthreads and NPTL. When 
> > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is enabled, UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME is also enabled 
> > by default. UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME provides clock_nanosleep().
> 
> I haven't looked at it in detail, but:
> 
> package/blktrace/Config.in:     depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()

Added in commit 08b9e24eaa4e. No previous threads dependency.

> package/can-utils/Config.in:    depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()

Added in commit dbfca7963049. No previous threads dependency.

> package/dvblast/Config.in:      depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()

Added in commit ec875d9bf9b183, changed from a previous plain threads 
dependency.

Yann, do you remember the reason why "clock_nanosleep() is only availabe with 
NPTL" as commit ec875d9bf9b183 says?

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Kurt Van Dijck]

> Hi Thomas,
> 
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:33:36AM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 12:19:27 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:10:51AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > > > nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads  
> > > 
> > > What is your indication that this is the case?

The input of Thomas below indeed was my indication.
Adding this effectively solved/avoided build problems
using toolchains with threads but without NPTL threads.
So I thought the puzzle was complete here ...

> > > In the uClibc-ng config 
> > > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is selected by both linuxthreads and NPTL. When 
> > > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is enabled, UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME is also enabled 
> > > by default. UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME provides clock_nanosleep().
> > 
> > I haven't looked at it in detail, but:
> > 
> > package/blktrace/Config.in:     depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> 
> Added in commit 08b9e24eaa4e. No previous threads dependency.
> 
> > package/can-utils/Config.in:    depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> 
> Added in commit dbfca7963049. No previous threads dependency.
> 
> > package/dvblast/Config.in:      depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> 
> Added in commit ec875d9bf9b183, changed from a previous plain threads 
> dependency.

> 
> Yann, do you remember the reason why "clock_nanosleep() is only availabe with 
> NPTL" as commit ec875d9bf9b183 says?
> 
> baruch

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Yann E. MORIN]

On 2018-01-04 12:28 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck spake thusly:
> > Hi Thomas,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:33:36AM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > > On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 12:19:27 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:10:51AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > > > > nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads  
> > > > 
> > > > What is your indication that this is the case?
> 
> The input of Thomas below indeed was my indication.
> Adding this effectively solved/avoided build problems
> using toolchains with threads but without NPTL threads.
> So I thought the puzzle was complete here ...
> 
> > > > In the uClibc-ng config 
> > > > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is selected by both linuxthreads and NPTL. When 
> > > > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is enabled, UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME is also enabled 
> > > > by default. UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME provides clock_nanosleep().
> > > 
> > > I haven't looked at it in detail, but:
> > > 
> > > package/blktrace/Config.in:     depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> > 
> > Added in commit 08b9e24eaa4e. No previous threads dependency.
> > 
> > > package/can-utils/Config.in:    depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> > 
> > Added in commit dbfca7963049. No previous threads dependency.
> > 
> > > package/dvblast/Config.in:      depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> > 
> > Added in commit ec875d9bf9b183, changed from a previous plain threads 
> > dependency.
> 
> > 
> > Yann, do you remember the reason why "clock_nanosleep() is only availabe with 
> > NPTL" as commit ec875d9bf9b183 says?

No, I am not sure, but the current code of uClibc-ng has:

    $ cat librt/Makefile.in
    [...]
    17 ifeq ($(UCLIBC_HAS_THREADS_NATIVE),y)
    18 librt_filter_SRC += mq_notify.c timer_create.c timer_delete.c \
    19 	timer_getoverr.c timer_gettime.c timer_settime.c
    20 else
    21 librt_filter_SRC += clock_nanosleep.c clock_getcpuclockid.c clock_gettime.c
    22 endif
    [...]

So, if I read that correctly, the clock_*.c files are excluded (filtered)
if there is no support for native threads.

Now, since glibc and musl always have NPTL and always have clock_nanosleep,
and only uClibc has a conditional NPTL, we made clock_nanosleep et al.
depend on NPTL.

Q.E.D.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Yann,

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 04:52:13PM +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> On 2018-01-04 12:28 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck spake thusly:
> > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:33:36AM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 12:19:27 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:10:51AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > > > > > nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads  
> > > > > 
> > > > > What is your indication that this is the case?
> > 
> > The input of Thomas below indeed was my indication.
> > Adding this effectively solved/avoided build problems
> > using toolchains with threads but without NPTL threads.
> > So I thought the puzzle was complete here ...
> > 
> > > > > In the uClibc-ng config 
> > > > > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is selected by both linuxthreads and NPTL. When 
> > > > > UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is enabled, UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME is also enabled 
> > > > > by default. UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME provides clock_nanosleep().
> > > > 
> > > > I haven't looked at it in detail, but:
> > > > 
> > > > package/blktrace/Config.in:     depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> > > 
> > > Added in commit 08b9e24eaa4e. No previous threads dependency.
> > > 
> > > > package/can-utils/Config.in:    depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> > > 
> > > Added in commit dbfca7963049. No previous threads dependency.
> > > 
> > > > package/dvblast/Config.in:      depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> > > 
> > > Added in commit ec875d9bf9b183, changed from a previous plain threads 
> > > dependency.
> > 
> > > 
> > > Yann, do you remember the reason why "clock_nanosleep() is only availabe with 
> > > NPTL" as commit ec875d9bf9b183 says?
> 
> No, I am not sure, but the current code of uClibc-ng has:
> 
>     $ cat librt/Makefile.in
>     [...]
>     17 ifeq ($(UCLIBC_HAS_THREADS_NATIVE),y)
>     18 librt_filter_SRC += mq_notify.c timer_create.c timer_delete.c \
>     19 	timer_getoverr.c timer_gettime.c timer_settime.c
>     20 else
>     21 librt_filter_SRC += clock_nanosleep.c clock_getcpuclockid.c clock_gettime.c
>     22 endif
>     [...]
> 
> So, if I read that correctly, the clock_*.c files are excluded (filtered)
> if there is no support for native threads.
> 
> Now, since glibc and musl always have NPTL and always have clock_nanosleep,
> and only uClibc has a conditional NPTL, we made clock_nanosleep et al.
> depend on NPTL.
> 
> Q.E.D.

This contradicts the UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME help text that lists 
clock_nanosleep() with the API it enables. I guess it is the code the needs 
fixing here.

Waldemar?

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Wldemar,

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 09:19:59PM +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> Baruch Siach wrote,
> > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 04:52:13PM +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote:

[...]

> > > > Yann, do you remember the reason why "clock_nanosleep() is only 
> > > > availabe with NPTL" as commit ec875d9bf9b183 says?
> > > 
> > > No, I am not sure, but the current code of uClibc-ng has:
> > > 
> > >     $ cat librt/Makefile.in
> > >     [...]
> > >     17 ifeq ($(UCLIBC_HAS_THREADS_NATIVE),y)
> > >     18 librt_filter_SRC += mq_notify.c timer_create.c timer_delete.c \
> > >     19 	timer_getoverr.c timer_gettime.c timer_settime.c
> > >     20 else
> > >     21 librt_filter_SRC += clock_nanosleep.c clock_getcpuclockid.c clock_gettime.c
> > >     22 endif
> > >     [...]
> > > 
> > > So, if I read that correctly, the clock_*.c files are excluded (filtered)
> > > if there is no support for native threads.
> > > 
> > > Now, since glibc and musl always have NPTL and always have clock_nanosleep,
> > > and only uClibc has a conditional NPTL, we made clock_nanosleep et al.
> > > depend on NPTL.
> > > 
> > > Q.E.D.
> > 
> > This contradicts the UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME help text that lists 
> > clock_nanosleep() with the API it enables. I guess it is the code the needs 
> > fixing here.
> > 
> > Waldemar?
> 
> Hmm. I do not exactly understand what you mean.
> It seems some extra advanced realtime functions where added in
> commit a202cf6f119f41532b60ad28bc48746b535fd34c, because at this
> time NPTL was available. A user can disable these extra functions if
> it is unused in his usecase.
> 
> So I believe, when an application is using clock_nanosleep, Buildroot
> should depend on NPTL for it.

The UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME help text says that this options enables 
clock_nanosleep(). But with current code you must have NPTL enabled for 
clock_nanosleep(). So the help text is not correct.

This also means that architectures lack NPTL support can't have 
clock_nanosleep() at all. Is there a reason for that?

Thanks,
baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Kurt Van Dijck]

Hey,

[...]
> > > > > Yann, do you remember the reason why "clock_nanosleep() is only 
> > > > > availabe with NPTL" as commit ec875d9bf9b183 says?
[...]
> The UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME help text says that this options enables 
> clock_nanosleep(). But with current code you must have NPTL enabled for 
> clock_nanosleep(). So the help text is not correct.
> 
> This also means that architectures lack NPTL support can't have 
> clock_nanosleep() at all. Is there a reason for that?

I share the concern, I appears that a shortcut has been taken in the
uClibc configuration.

OTOH, the topic of this thread has drifted away.
From the nilfs-utils point of view, depending on NPTL is necessary
today, so the patch stands.
I propose to start a different thread, and merge this patch for
nilfs-utils. Doing so would fix the current build problems,
and when the uclibc problem eventually resolves, nilfs-utils too will be
patched to not depend on NPTL.

What do you think about that?

Kurt

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:17:08 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:

> > The UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME help text says that this options enables 
> > clock_nanosleep(). But with current code you must have NPTL enabled for 
> > clock_nanosleep(). So the help text is not correct.
> > 
> > This also means that architectures lack NPTL support can't have 
> > clock_nanosleep() at all. Is there a reason for that?  
> 
> I share the concern, I appears that a shortcut has been taken in the
> uClibc configuration.
> 
> OTOH, the topic of this thread has drifted away.
> From the nilfs-utils point of view, depending on NPTL is necessary
> today, so the patch stands.
> I propose to start a different thread, and merge this patch for
> nilfs-utils. Doing so would fix the current build problems,
> and when the uclibc problem eventually resolves, nilfs-utils too will be
> patched to not depend on NPTL.
> 
> What do you think about that?

I agree. Especially since the same problem affects other packages, and
we have already added a NPTL dependency for those. When/if the uClibc
problem is fixed, we can get back to those packages and remove the NPTL
dependency if clock_nanosleep() becomes usable without NPTL.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Kurt,

On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 11:17:08AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > > Yann, do you remember the reason why "clock_nanosleep() is only 
> > > > > > availabe with NPTL" as commit ec875d9bf9b183 says?
> [...]
> > The UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME help text says that this options enables 
> > clock_nanosleep(). But with current code you must have NPTL enabled for 
> > clock_nanosleep(). So the help text is not correct.
> > 
> > This also means that architectures lack NPTL support can't have 
> > clock_nanosleep() at all. Is there a reason for that?
> 
> I share the concern, I appears that a shortcut has been taken in the
> uClibc configuration.
> 
> OTOH, the topic of this thread has drifted away.
> From the nilfs-utils point of view, depending on NPTL is necessary
> today, so the patch stands.
> I propose to start a different thread, and merge this patch for
> nilfs-utils. Doing so would fix the current build problems,
> and when the uclibc problem eventually resolves, nilfs-utils too will be
> patched to not depend on NPTL.
> 
> What do you think about that?

I agree. There were a few more unrelated comment on this patch. Please fix and 
repost.

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Kurt Van Dijck]

> Hi Kurt,
> 
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 11:17:08AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
[...] 
> I agree. There were a few more unrelated comment on this patch. Please fix and 
> repost.

Ok, now I got lost.
I cannot find any comments on this ('[PATCH 1/2] ... NPTL threads') patch other
than the uclibc remark you had.

Can you indicate the timestamps of the other comments, so I can re-read them.
I can't fix anything without those, isn't it?

Kind regards,
Kurt

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Kurt,

On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 02:20:50PM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 11:17:08AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> [...] 
> > I agree. There were a few more unrelated comment on this patch. Please fix and 
> > repost.
> 
> Ok, now I got lost.
> I cannot find any comments on this ('[PATCH 1/2] ... NPTL threads') patch other
> than the uclibc remark you had.
> 
> Can you indicate the timestamps of the other comments, so I can re-read them.
> I can't fix anything without those, isn't it?

My comment are archived in the link below:

  http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/855530/

I refer to the part below the 'depends on' that this patch adds.

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Waldemar Brodkorb]

Hi Baruch,
Baruch Siach wrote,

> The UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME help text says that this options enables 
> clock_nanosleep(). But with current code you must have NPTL enabled for 
> clock_nanosleep(). So the help text is not correct.
> 
> This also means that architectures lack NPTL support can't have 
> clock_nanosleep() at all. Is there a reason for that?

You are right. It seems there is no reason for it.
clock_nanosleep is internally using a syscall.

I prepared attached patch and running the regression tests.

Do you like to test or review?

I cleaned up old code, which might be only required for Linux
kernels older than 2.6.0, which I do not going to support anyway.

best regards
 Waldemar
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0006-rt-cleanup-and-allow-to-build-for-linuxthreads.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 11284 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20180107/62b2ebc0/attachment.patch>

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Kurt Van Dijck]

Hey,

> On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 11:10:51AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads
> 
> What is your indication that this is the case? In the uClibc-ng config 
> UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is selected by both linuxthreads and NPTL. When 
> UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME is enabled, UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME is also enabled 
> by default. UCLIBC_HAS_ADVANCED_REALTIME provides clock_nanosleep().
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
> > ---
> >  package/nilfs-utils/Config.in | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> > index 0c6b7a0..9dda27c 100644
> > --- a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> > +++ b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> >  config BR2_PACKAGE_NILFS_UTILS
> >  	bool "nilfs-utils"
> >  	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS # sem_open()
> > +	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> 
> NPTL implies threads support, so the NPTL dependency alone is enough.
> 
> You also need to update the comment.
> 

IMHO, appending the comment 'sem_open()' to BR2_..._NPTL would only
cause confusion, since sem_open() does not depend on BR2_..._NPTL.

Given the recent discussion about clock_nanosleep not really depending
on BR2_..._NPTL, I suspect a change in the near future, so I hesitate to
remove the BR2_..._THREADS dependency.

How exactly is the current patch wrong?
KConfig resolves this, better than any of us would, so I see no
advantage in modifying the patch.

> >  	depends on BR2_USE_MMU # util-linux libmount, libblkid
> >  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBUUID
> >  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBBLKID

Kind regards,
Kurt

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Thu,  4 Jan 2018 11:10:51 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
> ---
>  package/nilfs-utils/Config.in | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> index 0c6b7a0..9dda27c 100644
> --- a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> +++ b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>  config BR2_PACKAGE_NILFS_UTILS
>  	bool "nilfs-utils"
>  	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS # sem_open()
> +	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
>  	depends on BR2_USE_MMU # util-linux libmount, libblkid
>  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBUUID
>  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBBLKID

You forgot to update the Config.in comment accordingly. Also, I've
updated the commit log to summarize why we keep both the threads *and*
NPTL dependencies, even though it might look redundant.

Applied with those changes. Thanks!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] nilfs-utils: need NPTL threads

[Kurt Van Dijck]

> Hello,
> 
> On Thu,  4 Jan 2018 11:10:51 +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> > nilfs-utils use clock_nanosleep(), which comes with NPTL threads
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kurt Van Dijck <dev.kurt@vandijck-laurijssen.be>
> > ---
> >  package/nilfs-utils/Config.in | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> > index 0c6b7a0..9dda27c 100644
> > --- a/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> > +++ b/package/nilfs-utils/Config.in
> > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> >  config BR2_PACKAGE_NILFS_UTILS
> >  	bool "nilfs-utils"
> >  	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS # sem_open()
> > +	depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS_NPTL # clock_nanosleep()
> >  	depends on BR2_USE_MMU # util-linux libmount, libblkid
> >  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBUUID
> >  	select BR2_PACKAGE_UTIL_LINUX_LIBBLKID
> 
> You forgot to update the Config.in comment accordingly. Also, I've
> updated the commit log to summarize why we keep both the threads *and*
> NPTL dependencies, even though it might look redundant.
> 
> Applied with those changes. Thanks!

Only now, after having seen the commit, I realise you all meant the
'comment' section below, and not the '# clock_nanosleep()' comment :-)

Thanks,
Kurt