[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201031144935.GL534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 10:49:37 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] MT fork
On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 08:41:40AM -0600, Ariadne Conill wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Saturday, October 31, 2020 7:35:57 AM MDT Timo Teras wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 Oct 2020 14:29:32 +0100
> >
> > Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote:
> > > * Timo Teras <timo.teras@....fi> [2020-10-31 09:22:04 +0200]:
> > > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 15:31:54 -0600
> > > >
> > > > Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org> wrote:
> > > > > 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.
> >
> > Turns out the rebuilding firefox was enough. They allow O_LARGEFILE
> > there, but when built with earlier musl version it was zero...
> >
> > So basically the change there requires rebuild of certain applications.
> > Even if from kernel side the bit makes no big difference, but from
> > seccomp side it does.
>
> There is additional fallout from the new terminal window size ioctls as well.
> But fixing the seccomp policy there seems straightforward, and I think firefox
> 82.0-r2 will have the fix.
What new terminal window size ioctls? There are new functions for the
POSIX-future interfaces, but no new use of the ioctl that wasn't
already there in existing code paths. And this was already a problem
in firefox.
Rich
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.
