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-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2EDC1F453 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 17:14:03 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=wK/WQOCU9ca+w5SR ydvHVEJb3/rXxf65lPnPoWao18i1k/SL6NpGq6dsyfTtpomjIPPac2VVMPp83hkG erxdSyG7qX80yJM+4U2PU5+iU0YyvfacAGHU5roFhfqMKkuYSWWXJqsDnH/B+bOa 4T76OQwHgTR0hNwhKVAxy1IeHyk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=TqN4ylJ0D8HWHvqEqt+Plu XEnzc=; b=mbvhL8IB+un0kuzPpjlX/HIDwEBmaHH50O7KpSbGy7DaLB2mRmRIDt qUZ9JtaHnZMG2jL74slq6Et8WGetwtAX7OHt34qzwxo8UpOLEv09QqoCzCUlC4PV 1XlwPHx+lhRZ5CPuBPScrkq+ZwcA0z8PP3ETJCGIaG2A2zRlj77e8= Received: (qmail 90969 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2019 17:14:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 90959 invoked by uid 89); 23 Jan 2019 17:14:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-HELO: smtprelay.synopsys.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=synopsys.com; s=mail; t=1548263638; bh=/WbqySPX2ZuElF+I2LOZfQE7zMnqUgL/eKm1we+g9Cg=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=i/auQ1eRz4Bi7XwgEWhMjpiDDZ+Fp1loN0ktPw4iT64Zi2tkga8DoFn7hSxgvnk1W avicFXRNwuolJEpKn40k2V2TLIIgJF1i81gVIKGLX6iTqa0uLbFeHJ+FxLu7JujEit CXE/eYuXlmaftfiJhJjfGz4RuDSaD2XJREyNwIbq+8oktOgvfGqd/RaAKWj15FiVyG BPGatN+mAg0vW8T9GwqVKJDGJgiTis/7Cogp7Y2Ab8zrhSR+G9RaXvjgrm302n5ry/ 07xmGEiDdCvfLnEOYsVCpjBjORY614qifEToCqCYBayr1KDijVmzSaS9O+9Mvdy7iD cwkjfbe0pS12w== Subject: Re: misc/check-installed-headers-c failing due to upstream kernel change To: Carlos O'Donell , Ben Hutchings , CC: arcml , Feng Tang , Steven Rostedt , Andrew Morton Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha References: <4db851ae-9bb2-2159-96bf-c4b34b505bd9@synopsys.com> <1548259069.3229.308.camel@codethink.co.uk> <26167c76-7d83-40e9-49d3-1c38b6ae3f8a@redhat.com> From: Vineet Gupta Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 09:13:46 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <26167c76-7d83-40e9-49d3-1c38b6ae3f8a@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 1/23/19 8:51 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 1/23/19 10:57 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> On Mon, 2019-01-21 at 14:56 -0800, Vineet Gupta wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> It seems a recent upstream kernel change (went in 5.0-rcX) 81c9d43f9487 >>> ("kernel/sysctl: add panic_print into sysctl") trips one of the glibc tests. >>> >>> FAIL: misc/check-installed-headers-c >>> >>>> :: sys/sysctl.h >>>> :::: >>>> *** Obsolete types detected: >>>> ~/install/compilers/arc-linux-gnu/sysroot/usr/include/linux /sysctl.h: >>>> KERN_PANIC_PRINT=78, /* ulong: bitmask to print system info on panic */ >>> >>> It doesn't seem to like ulong (inside a comment). I don't have enough foo to fix >>> it, but wanted to bring it to notice anyways. >> >> This additions looks like a mistake, anyway - Linux's binary sysctl >> interface is only there for ancient compatibility and no new sysctls >> should be added to this enumeration. > > Just to be clear, this glibc test failure is a false positive [1], and > we're working to correct this [2]. However, if this is also not needed on > the kernel side, then that's also OK with us :-) > [1] https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-01/msg00413.html [2] https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-01/msg00513.html Great, I didn't skim thru the mailing list before posting this. So this is already known and being worked on ! Does it make sense to add the minimal fix for 2.29 ? It is likely in near future, people using the released glibc with newer kernel will run into this, unless kernel folks zap this quickly, within the current release. -Vineet