From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EECC41F9FD for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:18:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD6863950433; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:18:12 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CD6863950433 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1615209492; bh=vFsyW+9B219TjvmA6aaBwPh09rrvukAu4al9pSAB2R8=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=GDWsyTG/BZkRwXM2XxmeSLD749OsVHsTRXCJzGHYCCi4B2agaib0bf4OZ91J4RTIH fDkUVScIc9iHUrPiHbSHrslW3BL2UsH8cQCtgmlSO+pE7mmh7Otf/V6JNzxF+d9xpl WlztBZW0FIvZTbDJ+RBGm1C1b60lYS2bZ+PEL9JA= Received: from mail-qt1-x830.google.com (mail-qt1-x830.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A0CD3950406 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:18:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 7A0CD3950406 Received: by mail-qt1-x830.google.com with SMTP id z6so2293327qts.2 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 05:18:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=vFsyW+9B219TjvmA6aaBwPh09rrvukAu4al9pSAB2R8=; b=kFHneiDdwjem3Po/9NCrITanARpKRgx9ffzAvI/mK9kIBwPB2Lqi4LyNKDHYaIOU9U jx4CL1gF4kaV+304vZDEWkalQ0rtvbWERHb2eZJcqacf37TNlmJWYH105eyW0ZlfLVwr QlAB7KvKhSl7ZCrcR1dNnK57xHnm2m+KflWNixCiBzpz2oKizBb71sFR6uSmjd1gbL5x L2FtLu3jCMoEsHudI6tH+F0QUgclG7d8wdAgrUUVckyDqVSPATQ7+Jn1Bc9m5KOtkWl3 xeA0OaKwXgyKyFkIcxM6lHpApPF9Pwdrv524/JxhyRUXRbZTA+VR/JogMCMVCR4ghTmI w6KA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530D5bDlb2n1XHtwQ+gIQQPj6OV2TRYWX48tQYA5OYz1iQS1HPl1 IXutTPcPcldzgfWRHYiBABSkU7QYmnmluA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzQxlKq+rppJ7mER9PfvjsvjbN1DZLihZlrC5BnPKmca4rURvdklFpDYEA+D0wRrVxKjlvANw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:47cc:: with SMTP id d12mr12240255qtr.147.1615209489954; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 05:18:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([177.194.48.209]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id f27sm7616035qkh.118.2021.03.08.05.18.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Mar 2021 05:18:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/52] Add 64 bit time support on legacy ABIs To: Joseph Myers References: <20210305201518.798584-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> Message-ID: <2140c2b1-20cf-a70b-8572-7e049dbc9fb4@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 10:18:07 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Adhemerval Zanella Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" On 05/03/2021 20:57, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 5 Mar 2021, Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha wrote: > >> I checked for i686-linux-gnu running on a x86_64 5.4 kernel, >> powerpc-linux-gnu running on ppc64 5.10 kernel, and on >> arm-linux-gnueabihf running on arm64 4.12.13 kernel. As expected, >> the arm shows some tests failures due the missing kernel support: > > I'd expect tests on an older kernel to be UNSUPPORTED, not FAIL. > > More precisely: tests of times that can be represented in 32 bits, but > using the 64-bit interfaces, should be PASS, and tests of times that can't > be represented in 64 bits should be UNSUPPORTED as long as those are in a > separate testcase from the tests of times that can be represented in 32 > bits. If in the same testcase, FAIL seems the worst result, since it's > not indicating any bug in glibc. > The problem is how to recognize a glibc failure over, a kernel failure, and a kernel missing support. I think we add a syscall probe for 64-bit time_t syscall and assume a kernel without support for ENOSYS and act accordingly.