From owner-freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Tue Aug 7 15:03:55 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C6581061778 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 15:03:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markjdb@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pg1-x52b.google.com (mail-pg1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B94173563; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 15:03:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markjdb@gmail.com) Received: by mail-pg1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id n7-v6so7982142pgq.4; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 08:03:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=0NgdCZdDIPgbFzQ5GxEi9usqxrm1i8SgUeWC/hJowr0=; b=fpgGJoqNrH+6vZ+UxFo+4D8wyiRgRZATEEkKAkMsdTr0CN/ZvWyi6UIWWKdTTjy4CH 7yuyoV7DESR2oEyNTKL43DrDvvhQ4PSvoecDsJom1w9AJTrV6UnwMvmBaPaF9zJGZDaV F9RM2fh2dU0ht2s5FnVtLa7x96vJUEOWeYawl8SbWmSnCB8I41TV6mD/IoTXoJle5pEW 0rPC2DOulfgudz/g8Gg3uRd/H9dJvy2Oho04HmAfpa0C3YZkdLoWtpPOubhKZSCTHONS hEPU+leDUWDe6zYuNgmdMn+G9y1gCCSmxg+3EQXPJJDVKAilN9ECNbGH6rwmZ26Wo+0z dvWg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=0NgdCZdDIPgbFzQ5GxEi9usqxrm1i8SgUeWC/hJowr0=; b=OAWws5jtFoIilNIW7S/gMpGl1r1MPcsJsNHAUHhvuuyCPVJvmvEl0zDEBYFrjG3ijQ BljbpZ2C1NeToiWnD1AQb3rtsB7wwKycly0Bay7KFBeO/8Tyk2JPv7At+xESBA77F3u5 evSXVOzAb9cAnV2ZUwmWa1JFsPqrPEU3ghv2IHkAkBJbl/8+eZNSKmNAuIZpYsTIMJwR /YQeb/+rUFJD7POC4CbKGnTI5tWOMxfS6A5w2J3s/5Wsu4jKuaaGsHfQfq00eINMx2HS WH6/nWeJfUDUBJz0DDk4i75Mbxe8Fn0BGl9+MRSjZ8aFG9Ion9gKJj6O9+QNtjZkz6z4 v2Ag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFyE/nm+cPffdt6dbP+iNiQbzYj33wGQFSVljTS18Hc8LLoIPpm D32R5Qb8kDJMPcyRLITFt+tzpWco X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdJFS++Typw+UYggUHg+mI5SADFWIePApufWa4kdTqY+8e4zp5WHgP49Z65rbLx3VEvWM4VNw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:4b5a:: with SMTP id k26-v6mr18569182pgl.384.1533654232995; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 08:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from raichu (toroon0560w-lp130-09-70-52-224-239.dsl.bell.ca. [70.52.224.239]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a20-v6sm6122577pfc.14.2018.08.07.08.03.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Aug 2018 08:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Mark Johnston Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:03:49 -0400 From: Mark Johnston To: Alan Somers Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Skipping tests that are unimplemented in 32-bit emulation Message-ID: <20180807150349.GF77150@raichu> References: <20180806191406.GA77150@raichu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:03:55 -0000 On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 02:18:35PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 1:14 PM, Mark Johnston wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 11:23:33AM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > > > I recently tried running the i386 test suite in a chroot on an amd64 > > > system. 162 tests failed, and 33 were broken. Some of the failures were > > > due to system calls that haven't been implemented in 32-bit emulation. > > > setfib(2) is an example. I think it's unlikely that anybody will ever > > need > > > 32-bit emulation for setfib(2), so perhaps we should just skip the test? > > > What's the best way to do that? I can come up with two ways: > > > > > > 1) At runtime, check the hw.machine sysctl and see if it matches some > > > compile time preprocessor constant. I don't know what constant to use, > > > though. Checking __amd64__ would only work for i386 binaries on amd64 > > > kernels, and not something else like mips binaries on mips64 kernels (I > > > don't know if we support that, but I don't want to rule it out). > > > > > > 2) At buildtime, put an "allowed_architectures=i386" metadata property > > into > > > the Kyuafile for that test program. This would require support in > > > /usr/share/mk/bsd.test.mk. It would also require patching Kyua itself, > > > because currently "Kyua config" returns the architecture for which it was > > > built, not the one on which it's running. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > I don't have any particular suggestions, but I'd personally rather avoid > > a solution that requires tests to opt-in to running under 32-bit > > emulation, which I think excludes 2). I'd be happy to help annotate > > any failing tests as required. It bugs me that the test suite currently > > doesn't cover such relatively complicated functions as > > freebsd32_copy_msg_out(). > > I don't think that 2 would necessarily be opt-in, because an undefined > value for allowed_architectures is interpreted as meaning "all". It could > be opt-out instead. But it could still be a little awkward. Option 1 > could be accomplished for atf-c testcases by comparing the value of > __LP64__ to a hardcoded list of known 64-bit processors as returned by > uname(3). But I don't know how to implement 1 for atf-sh programs. An > atf-sh program would need to know the architecture of any binary that it > might invoke. Is there anything in /etc indicating what architecture the > image was built for? Should we just use "file /lib/libc.so.*"? Could we instead build and install a /usr/tests32 suite on systems that can support it, and use a top-level Kyuafile and kyua.conf that overrides the "architecture" variable?