From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] kselftest/arm64: Add tests for SVE vector configuration
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 17:23:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210802162331.GJ4668@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210802153614.GC25258@arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1000 bytes --]
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 04:36:15PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 03:19:39PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > popen() appears to be break the _SET_VL_ONEXEC test. Between a lack of
> > strace in my test filesystem and not spotting anything obvious in the
> > glibc sources I can't tell exactly where it's doing something different,
> > though it does feel like it should be a separate testcase if it's
> Ah, dang, popen() will run the target program via a shell, so there will
> actually be two fork-exec()s, with the VL being reset to default by the
> second exec.
Oh, of course - it's basically a more useful system(). The bit where it
adds the sh invocation was buried somewhere in the glibc source I didn't
find.
> This is the kind of reason why I tend not to go for it, I guess --
> it looks convenient, but it's just that little bit overcooked as an API.
> *sigh*
Well, if you're working at the stdio level it's fine I think but this
program is at the level below that.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] kselftest/arm64: Add tests for SVE vector configuration
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 17:23:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210802162331.GJ4668@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210802153614.GC25258@arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1000 bytes --]
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 04:36:15PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 03:19:39PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > popen() appears to be break the _SET_VL_ONEXEC test. Between a lack of
> > strace in my test filesystem and not spotting anything obvious in the
> > glibc sources I can't tell exactly where it's doing something different,
> > though it does feel like it should be a separate testcase if it's
> Ah, dang, popen() will run the target program via a shell, so there will
> actually be two fork-exec()s, with the VL being reset to default by the
> second exec.
Oh, of course - it's basically a more useful system(). The bit where it
adds the sh invocation was buried somewhere in the glibc source I didn't
find.
> This is the kind of reason why I tend not to go for it, I guess --
> it looks convenient, but it's just that little bit overcooked as an API.
> *sigh*
Well, if you're working at the stdio level it's fine I think but this
program is at the level below that.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-02 16:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-29 15:15 [PATCH v3 0/4] kselftest/arm64: Vector length configuration tests Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] kselftest/arm64: Provide a helper binary and "library" for SVE RDVL Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] kselftest/arm64: Validate vector lengths are set in sve-probe-vls Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] kselftest/arm64: Add tests for SVE vector configuration Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` Mark Brown
2021-07-29 16:06 ` Dave Martin
2021-07-29 16:06 ` Dave Martin
2021-07-29 17:34 ` Mark Brown
2021-07-29 17:34 ` Mark Brown
2021-08-02 10:25 ` Dave Martin
2021-08-02 10:25 ` Dave Martin
2021-08-02 11:33 ` Mark Brown
2021-08-02 11:33 ` Mark Brown
2021-08-02 12:37 ` Dave Martin
2021-08-02 12:37 ` Dave Martin
2021-08-02 14:19 ` Mark Brown
2021-08-02 14:19 ` Mark Brown
2021-08-02 15:36 ` Dave Martin
2021-08-02 15:36 ` Dave Martin
2021-08-02 16:23 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2021-08-02 16:23 ` Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] kselftest/arm64: Add a TODO list for floating point tests Mark Brown
2021-07-29 15:15 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210802162331.GJ4668@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.