[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 14:29:32 +0100
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: Timo Teras <timo.teras@....fi>
Cc: Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org>, musl@...ts.openwall.com,
Milan P. Stanić <mps@...anta.net>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] MT fork
* Timo Teras <timo.teras@....fi> [2020-10-31 09:22:04 +0200]:
> Hi
>
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 15:31:54 -0600
> Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org> wrote:
>
> > On Friday, October 30, 2020 12:57:17 PM MDT Rich Felker wrote:
> > > There was a regression in musl too, I think. With
> > > 27b2fc9d6db956359727a66c262f1e69995660aa you should be able to
> > > re-enable parallel mark. If you get a chance to test, let us know if
> > > it works for you.
> >
> > I have pushed current musl git plus the MT fork patch to Alpine edge
> > as Alpine musl 1.2.2_pre0, and reenabling parallel mark has worked
> > fine.
> >
> > It would be nice to have a musl 1.2.2 release that I can use for the
> > source tarball instead of a git snapshot, but this will do for now.
>
> And now firefox is utterly broken. Though seems to be not related to MT
> fork patch.
>
> Bisected it down to commit b8b729bd22c28c9116c2fce65dce207a35299c26
> "fix missing O_LARGEFILE values on x86_64, x32, and mips64"
>
> I think this breaks the seccomp because now e.g. fopen() calls has this
> bit set for the syscall and seccomp does not like it.
>
> Wondering whether to fix firefox seccomp ignore this bit, or if this
> commit needs reconsideration?
please report it to firefox while we work out what's best.
this is something they sould be aware of.
>
> Timo
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.
