[LTP] [PATCH] clone10: add support archs

[Li Wang]

On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 9:06 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> > Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> > > > Acked-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
>
> > > LGTM. Indeed only these 3 archs don't TCONF.
> > > Acked-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
>
> > > Out of curiosity, where is the support defined in kernel?
> > > "if (clone_flags & CLONE_SETTLS)" is in many archs:
>
> > Not based on this, the clone10.c test was written and gets tested
> > only on the known archs (x86_64, s390x, aarch64) by now.
>
> > And in case that other archs (not tested) have different behavior like i386,
> > so we are limited to the know/tested archs.
>
> > If we can get another arch to verified we can add it to the
> > .supported_archs as well.
>
> > $ cat -n ltp/include/lapi/tls.h
> >     ...
> >     53 static inline void init_tls(void)
> >     54 {
> >     55     #if defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__) || defined(__s390x__)
> >     56     tls_ptr = allocate_tls_area();
> >     57 #else
> >     ...
>
> include/lapi/tls.h
>
> static inline void init_tls(void)
> {
> #if defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__) || defined(__s390x__)
>         tls_ptr = allocate_tls_area();
> #else
>         tst_brk(TCONF, "Unsupported architecture for TLS");
> #endif
>
> I see. First IMHO the message in include/lapi/tls.h is pretty misleading. It
> does not look to me as a test limitation, but as a missing arch support in
> kernel.  IMHO the message should have been something like:

+1

> tst_brk(TCONF, "Test not supported only architecture");
>
> (i.e. to mention "test")
>
> Also having arch listed in the test and also in tls.h is redundant.
> IMHO it should be only on a single place.

Absolutely yes, and looks like the ifdefine in tls.h should be cleanup too.
Feel free do that in a seperate patch or I will look into it tomorrow.


-- 
Regards,
Li Wang