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 5106 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2020 20:20:26 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 26 Oct 2020 20:20:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 1486 invoked by uid 550); 26 Oct 2020 20:20:23 -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 1465 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2020 20:20:22 -0000 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at disroot.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail; t=1603743609; bh=3VeGXKe4UYMk+L/ZscpkcwPR4k2xqh+g41gOSHzVl8M=; h=To:Subject:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=NsrONvj/I45Al1cvvJxL9YzshqvqvZPls/WtqDqmqh2pXyFlzhjwO0myWIhGz2U7T QKAhzfu9bMpqOcNaMAYQdYANZTSbS4rZHrV3NvtgQ9vhgxPzZz8GpavydLs5jgTw7v PLSq6XwoqUGxIbkZQ573mU/HYknTX7Vw7vyxpvDzSZd9pmWz4++3GK122/rC3rIJrG kGVG19Zbt41DdzIQJda2sk6RcX63BXPSaH1yjiFTve+0OthKnof54uB7pc1Go8o91k O6jaPgWqopPDfVy2dAjnLQUzAxUdH+yL/jzwX450qw9AuuvDImnybqD/I7+HsfyetM KxRdN/bJo8W+g== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 To: , From: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89rico_Nogueira?= Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 17:11:26 -0300 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20201026195246.GN534@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Subject: Re: [musl] Status report and MT fork On Mon Oct 26, 2020 at 12:52 PM -03, Rich Felker wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 03:44:51PM -0300, =C3=89rico Nogueira wrote: > > Re. the patches, I am now able to import an image into gscan2pdf (a Per= l > > GTK application) - though it required building Perl with a bigger threa= d > > stack size. With musl 1.2.1 it simply hung on a futex syscall. > > Great to hear! Was it "working" in earlier musl though? The crash (as > discussed on irc) was clearly a stack overflow but it seems odd that > it would be newly introduced, unless it was just really borderline on > fitting before. > > Rich I hadn't tested with any musl version but 1.2.1. A quick test with 1.1.24 shows that it didn't hang then, but hit the same segfault if using perl without a fixed thread stack size. The only reason the segfault seemed new to me was because the program had never reached past the hang in the futex syscall :) I will see if I can find the time to write some programs to torture test the impl further, assuming that would help. Cheers, =C3=89rico