Your message dated Sat, 4 Jun 2011 14:46:20 +0200 with message-id <20110604124620.GA4182@volta.aurel32.net> and subject line Re: Bug#618562: syscall in libc6 is broken for __NR_fanotify_mark has caused the Debian Bug report #618562, regarding syscall in libc6 is broken for __NR_fanotify_mark to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 618562: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=618562 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: submit@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: 孙海勇 <sunhy@lemote.com>
- Subject: syscall in libc6 is broken for __NR_fanotify_mark
- From: Chen Jie <chenj@lemote.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 12:36:30 +0000
- Message-id: <AANLkTikhgyCKHLtHLxZ0wgsXc8UsdCpgmd7ONOuSL2k4@mail.gmail.com>
Package: libc6 Version: 2.11.2-10 syscall(__NR_fanotify_mark, fanotify_fd, flags, mask, dfd, pathname), failed with 'Invalid argument'. strace shows 'syscall' didn't pass the correct parameters: syscall(0x10f1, 0x3, 0x11, 0, 0x20, 0, 0xffffff9c, 0x4013e0) ( The expected one is: syscall(0x10f1, 0x3, 0x17, 0x20, 0, -100, 0x4013e0) ) Direct __NR_fanotify_mark call works. Test platform is fuloong-2f box: 1. CPU: loongson 2f 2. libc6 version 2.11.2-10 and 2.11.2-11 3. Linux-2.6.37 with fanotify enabled (64bit kernel) (also tried Linux-2.6.38) 4. Debian squeeze mipsel (o32 ABI) Attachment is the source code of test program, usage: 1. tar xf fanotify-test.tar.bz2 2. cd fanotify-test 3. gcc -o fa-test *.c 4. ./fa-test Note: modify "missing.h" to switch between indirect __NR_fanotify_mark syscall and direct syscall.Attachment: fanotify-test.tar.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Chen Jie <chenj@lemote.com>, 618562-done@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: 孙海勇 <sunhy@lemote.com>, wuzhangjin@gmail.com
- Subject: Re: Bug#618562: syscall in libc6 is broken for __NR_fanotify_mark
- From: Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
- Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 14:46:20 +0200
- Message-id: <20110604124620.GA4182@volta.aurel32.net>
- In-reply-to: <20110327231403.GB31058@hall.aurel32.net>
- References: <AANLkTikhgyCKHLtHLxZ0wgsXc8UsdCpgmd7ONOuSL2k4@mail.gmail.com> <20110326191309.GD8929@hall.aurel32.net> <AANLkTi=KKtLyx0yt2=+RR3E5-1CT-QaAU+nUBELvtEVq@mail.gmail.com> <20110327231403.GB31058@hall.aurel32.net>
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 01:14:03AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 05:13:31AM +0000, Chen Jie wrote: > > Hi Aurelien, > > > > Got it, thanks for the explanation. > > > > Just curious, does the same problem exist on X86-64(64bit kernel + 32 bit > > userland)? If yes, should the caller of syscall() need to split each 64bit > > argument into two 32bit arguments? > > > > It is not something which depends on the running kernel, but the problem > doesn't exists on x86 given the ABI doesn't requires 64-bit arguments to > be aligned. I have been able to reproduce the problem on powerpc and arm > though (they both require 64-bit values to be aligned). > > In any case on 32-bit machines, splitting 64-bit arguments into two > 32-bit arguments should always work, provided that the endianness is > correctly taken into account. > As explained, this is not a glibc bug, I am therefore closing the bug. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
--- End Message ---