Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 22:36:44 -0200
From: Alan Pillay <>
Subject: Re: Weekly Report of Porting musl to RISC-V Project #5

What is the current status of musl on RISC-V?
This was the last time I heard about it, but it has been many months since.

> Hello,
> Thanks to the folks, I passed the mid-term evaluation. Now it is about
> time to publish the fifth progress report on porting musl on RISC-V.
> Last week, the toolchain itself has been built for RISC-V and running
> on Spike, and libc-test [1] can be executed with it now. I posted the
> result of tests on [2]. The REPORT.txt file contains all error
> messages of failed tests, both run-time ones and compile-time ones.
> Some failures are expected since musl on x86_64 also does the same
> ones (e.g. errors in src/api/fcntl.c), but there are some unexpected
> errors too. I guess that the "warning: <the name of a header> is
> shorter than expected" warning indicates bugs in arch-dependent part
> of I/O functions or system calls (or kernel?) and it causes syntax
> errors in the same compilation unit.
> Moreover, some tests triggers a "signal 11" error (segmentation fault)
> in libc. I added some logs to [2]. They are bugs in the port,
> obviously. I am working on them.
> The good news is, anyway, some results are *better than x86_64*,
> especially in math functions :-)
> (probably the cause is the difference in the floating-point precision,
> though. it is usual in float tests...)
> It takes long, long time to get but finally I have a (seems-to-be)
> working test suite for the port. I will continue to debug and fix the
> port using the result. Stay tuned!
> [1]:
> [2]:
> --
> Masanori Ogino

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.