[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2023-04-25 Thread A. Wilcox
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #10 from A. Wilcox (awilfox)  ---
Indeed, the only technical issue with this patch is that it is outdated.  We
have an updated version.  I will upload the new version to this bug some time
this week after testing it against the latest release and main branch.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2023-04-25 Thread Carl Love
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #9 from Carl Love  ---
I looked thru the patch.  Nothing jumps out at me as being an issue.  But, that
doesn't guarantee anything given the assembly and all.  I did try to apply the
patch to test it but it doesn't apply.  

So, I would say, update the patch and lets test it on the supported BE and LE
systems to make sure the patch doesn't break anything.  Test it on the
non-standard systems where you want to use it.  As long as everything works
fine, I wouldn't object to it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2023-04-24 Thread Sam James
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #8 from Sam James  ---
(In reply to Carl Love from comment #4)
> 
> Given that IBM does not recommend using ELFv1 on Little endian and ELFv2 on
> Big endian, that is not to say it can't be done.  The proposed patch is not
> necessarily invalid but IBM will not support these but will also not stand
> in the way of someone else trying it but they are on their own for support.

In that case, is anyone aware of any technical issue with the patch?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2023-01-22 Thread Sam James
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

Sam James  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||s...@gentoo.org

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2019-05-14 Thread Brandon Bergren
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #7 from Brandon Bergren  ---
Ahh, I think we were using different meanings for the word "supported". I was
speaking in terms of "what can the hardware do, is specified in the ABI, and is
currently in use in the wild", not "what you can actually get official support
for".

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2019-03-11 Thread Brandon Bergren
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

Brandon Bergren  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||k...@bdragon.rtk0.net

--- Comment #6 from Brandon Bergren  ---
While I agree that using ELFv1 on LE is a completely unsupported configuration
and need not be supported, the OpenPOWER ELF V2 ABI is fully defined and
intended for use in both little- and big-endian environments.

Due to the improved toolchain support (specifically, lld's dropping of ELFv1
support entirely, and ELFv2 being a lot less "weird" of an ABI meaning it tends
to have less esoteric issues and can more easily leverage mainstream
optimizations) I see the future of BE on POWER to be ELFv2 as well.

And yes, FreeBSD is moving towards ELFv2 at a rapid pace. (I personally am
running ELFv2 userlands exclusively in FreeBSD on my POWER9 machines.)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2019-03-11 Thread A. Wilcox
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #5 from A. Wilcox (awilfox)  ---
I noted that it was specifically older versions of OpenSuSE.  Specifically, the
very first release.  I believe it is long deprecated; it still, however, does
exist.

> Similarly, with the musl libc.  From my discussion with the GCC team, they 
> said that musl has been known to play around with ELFv2 ABI on Big Endian but 
> they are off on their own in this regard as it isn't supported, recommended 
> or tested by IBM.

I fear "play around" may be a wee dismissive.  It's a serious port and it has
serious consumers, including Adélie Linux and Void Linux.  Additionally,
FreeBSD is planning to move to ELFv2 on Big Endian, which means eventually
FreeBSD will need to undefine VG_PLAT_USES_PPCTOC as well. :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2019-03-11 Thread Carl Love
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #4 from Carl Love  ---
IBM only supports ELFv1 ABI on Big endian machines and ELFv2 ABI on Little
endian machines.  I checked a little on the statements about the ELF usages. 
>From what I was told OpenSuSE uses ELFv2 ABI on little endian.  So, I would be
curious where to get the info that OpenSuSE is using ELFv1 ABI on Little
Endian.  Similarly, with the musl libc.  From my discussion with the GCC team,
they said that musl has been known to play around with ELFv2 ABI on Big Endian
but they are off on their own in this regard as it isn't supported, recommended
or tested by IBM.  The key thing is the OS, library, Valgrind etc.  all need to
either use ELFv1 ABI or ELFv2 ABI.  You can't mix these.

Given that IBM does not recommend using ELFv1 on Little endian and ELFv2 on Big
endian, that is not to say it can't be done.  The proposed patch is not
necessarily invalid but IBM will not support these but will also not stand in
the way of someone else trying it but they are on their own for support.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2019-03-09 Thread Julian Seward
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

Julian Seward  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||c...@us.ibm.com

--- Comment #3 from Julian Seward  ---
Carl, do you have any opinion on this?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2018-09-27 Thread awilfox
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

A. Wilcox (awilfox)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Attachment #115278|application/mbox|text/plain
  mime type||
 Attachment #115278|0   |1
   is patch||

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2018-09-27 Thread awilfox
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #2 from A. Wilcox (awilfox)  ---
Created attachment 115278
  --> https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=115278=edit
Ensure ELFv2 is supported on PPC64

This patch has been tested on PPC64 BE, both ELFv1 (Debian) and ELFv2 (Adélie).
 I don't have any LE hardware to test on, but there should be no functional
change.

I've tested memcheck and callgrind on both ELF ABIs on a POWER9 host running
big-endian and found no issues.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[valgrind] [Bug 398883] valgrind incorrectly assumes ABI on PowerPC based on endianness

2018-09-25 Thread awilfox
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398883

--- Comment #1 from A. Wilcox (awilfox)  ---
Okay, it doesn't have to be so hard.  There is already VG_PLAT_USES_PPCTOC; so
this change just needs to actually use that define instead of just endianness
to determine what ABI to use.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.