unofficial mirror of libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org, isaku.yamahata@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] Library OS support
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 10:46:49 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190917174649.GA13005@private.email.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1909162037230.25190@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>

Distro folks have their opinion. Can anyone from distro jump-in?

Yes, it can be implemented in either way.
If it's not tested, it's broken. test should be done with minimum libos.
I understand that your point is,
If I go for a normal x86_64-*-linux-gnu, test in the upstream CI is a must,
a strong requirement.
On the other hand, If i go for x86_64-*-linux-libos-gnu(or whatever we call it),
it not.

Thanks,


Thanks,
Isaku Yamahata

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 08:47:57PM +0000,
Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Sep 2019, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> 
> > If we have multiple versions, for example,
> >   x86_64-*-linux
> >   x86_64-*-linux_libosX
> >   x86_64-*-linux_libosY
> >   ...
> > it doesn't scale. It will cause maintenance hell.
> 
> Multiple different LibOS host triplets would indeed be an issue.  My point 
> is more like this: in various uses of QEMU it's often better to use 
> virtual boards and devices that don't correspond to any real hardware but 
> are convenient for emulation and for guest operating systems, rather than 
> to use emulation of a particular piece of real hardware.  Similarly, if 
> you don't constrain yourself to work with generic x86_64-*-linux-gnu 
> libraries, you can make the syscall interface for LibOS into something 
> that is designed to be convenient for library implementation on a wide 
> range of possible host OSes, rather than being tied to all the 
> peculiarities of the existing Linux kernel syscall ABI and the existing 
> glibc ports.  Only one such interface should be needed, not one for each 
> LibOS.
> 
> If however you continue with something that works with x86_64-*-linux-gnu 
> rather than a different triplet, aiming for generic x86_64-*-linux-gnu 
> libraries to work in a LibOS environment, my other point from the Cauldron 
> discussion applies: this is adding new interfaces to x86_64-*-linux-gnu 
> glibc and so there should be additions to the glibc testsuite that verify, 
> in a normal x86_64-*-linux-gnu glibc build, that those interfaces are 
> working as desired for LibOS purposes.  That probably means some kind of 
> minimal LibOS loader, that passes syscalls through to the host operating 
> system, should be included in the glibc testsuite - just as the 
> test-in-container infrastructure can be seen as support for building and 
> using a (very) minimal GNU/Linux distribution (complete with a local 
> implementation of enough of /bin/sh to work for the glibc tests) for those 
> tests that need to run in such a container environment.
> 
> -- 
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com

-- 
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-17 17:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-11 21:03 [RFC PATCH 00/11] Library OS support Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:03 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] x86-64, elf: make elf_machine_lazy_rel() ignore R_X86_64_NONE Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] elf: add macro to define note section for LibOS Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] elf: " Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] elf: add stub functions for LibOS support Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] elf: add hook, __libos_map_library to dl-open.c Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] elf/rtld: introduce runtime option to disable HP_TIMING_INLINE Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] malloc: make arena size configurable on startup Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-12  1:03   ` DJ Delorie
2019-09-12 18:43     ` Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] x86-64: replace syscall instruction with SYSCALL_INST macro Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] x86-64: add nop instruction after syscall instrunction Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] x86-64: make the number of nops after syscall configurable Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] benchtests: simple benchmark to measure nop effects Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-11 21:35   ` Patrick McGehearty
2019-09-12  0:10 ` [RFC PATCH 00/11] Library OS support Joseph Myers
2019-09-12  1:13   ` Isaku Yamahata
2019-09-16 20:47     ` Joseph Myers
2019-09-17 17:46       ` Isaku Yamahata [this message]
2019-09-17 13:19 ` Adhemerval Zanella

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

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/involved.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190917174649.GA13005@private.email.ne.jp \
    --to=isaku.yamahata@gmail.com \
    --cc=isaku.yamahata@intel.com \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).