From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 29959 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2021 23:01:50 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 19 Jan 2021 23:01:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 11305 invoked by uid 550); 19 Jan 2021 23:01:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 11275 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2021 23:01:47 -0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1611097293; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=A3NUvgIzjqp9Zd4YY+/be752pxhOvhTr8F0JQDV017p7Hm5EPh2J/sMyPdDJOd+piGXv+87u776yxiiwejpExPcaQNMS3RlbrzW4S1mU5OapoPqCFi3vVdk6SIllw7c6K9n5BG/EpKTRIZJ7xlF2X5znmpAkZMMd/K1q6QIHhjg= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1611097293; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=zteu+XVe+LGPT+pz1N1PNic6JlPz1aT93sQgGPblPqw=; b=TsLOUOa5XGWZwqmXCEPprQ2xGXKYqLi5tI3W5AbISa/ja9oEjtIK3s5wRSiduOH4snOrSeTE24aBfWeNn0zePLw3hbsHBC8tiBKGhsqGj6WbVdQoEP6eJgrk1yGP6VtGQ6Kqh5e+runWC24NPQwAYoTpQuc92A8aZez35Wv1FK8= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=zv.io; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=me@zv.io; dmarc=pass header.from= header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1611097293; s=zoho; d=zv.io; i=me@zv.io; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=zteu+XVe+LGPT+pz1N1PNic6JlPz1aT93sQgGPblPqw=; b=erWgOE8KNezsBsyqSYhNqyrDUUsxAtE1jpnlYT9cX/9bCwCUoDShXgEsRBqX4rEk Zt5JMLS7PPTNngt0PHfJIPNbymoFJUqC8Nqmja4TGq0Y72+5MGzZe8ycditbwLe49Mf PpIv+TluvoktEBvDb+dRKX/M6IxrvEq319pduNjM= Message-ID: <58068fc813f1c55d2b3dde305d2b8e29e9801668.camel@zv.io> From: Zach van Rijn To: Rasmus Andersson Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 17:01:28 -0600 In-Reply-To: References: <20210119193337.GB2006@voyager> <20210119211653.GK23432@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.4-0ubuntu1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ZohoMailClient: External Subject: Re: [musl] waitpid (wait4) on Linux 5 returns invalid values On Tue, 2021-01-19 at 14:02 -0800, Rasmus Andersson wrote: > The program compiles correctly with > https://more.musl.cc/9/x86_64-linux-musl/x86_64-linux-musl-native.tgz > (The GCC 9 version) Perhaps an issue with GCC 10? Rasmus, thank you for reporting this issue. Using your reproducer I'm able to observe the following: (1) GCC 10 as-published on musl.cc : BUG waitpid returned -10, wstat=0, errno=0 (No error information) (2) GCC 10 without this patch [1] : OK waitpid returned -1, wstat=0, errno=10 (No child process) which matches your GCC 9 (20200828) observation. This patch was applied to musl.cc as part of a series to add experimental riscv32 support in September 2020, but was applied universally and not strictly riscv32 targets. The patch in question was /not/ applied to the GCC 9 binaries as they were last updated in August of 2020, nor to earlier 10 ones. I am updating the build infrastructure to avoid contamination of "supported" targets by experimental patches such as this one. New (fixed and newer GCC) toolchains will be published as soon as they finish building (~24 hours). I will ping you off-list. Additional tests (not simply spot-checks) will be implemented for future releases. Sorry for the inconvenience. [1]: https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2020/09/03/14