This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 25 Feb 2016 16:35, Stefan Liebler wrote: > Beginning with Linux 4.3, the kernel headers contain direct system call > numbers __NR_socket etc. on s390x. On older kernels, the > socket-multiplexer syscall __NR_socketcall was used. > > To enable these new syscalls, the patch > "S390: Call direct system calls for socket operations." > (https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=016495b818cb61df7d0d10e6db54074271b3e3a5) > was applied upstream. > If glibc 2.23 is configured with --enable-kernel=4.3 and newer, > the direct socket syscalls are used. > For older kernels, the socket-multiplexer syscall is used. > > In glibc 2.22 and earlier, this patch is currently not applied. > If you build glibc on an kernel < 4.3, the socket-multiplexer syscall is > used. But if you build glibc on kernel >= 4.3, the direct > socket-syscalls are used. If you install this glibc on an > kernel < 4.3, all socket operations will fail. > See "Bug 19682 - s390x: Incorrect syscall definitions cause breakage > with Linux 4.3 headers" > (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19682) > The configure switch --enable-kernel does not influence this behaviour > on older glibc-releases. > > The solution is to remove the direct socket-syscalls in > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/s390/s390-64/syscalls.list (see attached patch) > on older glibc-releases as it was done by the upstream patch, too. These > entries were never used on s390x, but the c-files in > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/. > After this removal, the behaviour of the socket functions are not > changed compared to the original glibc release version and the > socket-multiplexer-syscall is always used. > > Florian Weimer told me, that he already did this for Fedora 23 (glibc > 2.22) and Fedora 22 (glibc 2.21). > Thus, backporting this to glibc branch 2.22, and 2.21 would be the best > for Fedora. > > Which other glibc-branches should be updated??? i would say all branches at least back to glibc-2.20 the Gentoo s390 boxes are on linux-4.4 so it won't impact our releasing, but would be good to have the releases themselves be OK on older :). -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |