From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF007C433EF for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 18:47:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92C3A60EB4 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 18:47:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231624AbhJFStq (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Oct 2021 14:49:46 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42554 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229564AbhJFStq (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Oct 2021 14:49:46 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x141.google.com (mail-il1-x141.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::141]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA5C4C061746 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x141.google.com with SMTP id i11so2841725ila.12 for ; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=CygA8fkyX9qUapamDo8kLl6SKnvu3s33vyLyCbGv8J4=; b=LFtwHc1ca3xqkUNhW6HD1oORCNYrEqZBbWpd7eixO8ShNxvUjn2k4MjHn/wK/8WXDM PCaxrZPMFdjkUvRlVD0XcW85t07GqCQobFk8QEivMnWVZHAeohAZYc9VsWT//aJbN1+Y 635lkIQnZRQ9GBIYNAhzWmJNDEWE263rssTvB257r9QzdHpICGqgxghVAHoJiSM8OnE8 RcIhytWGRUi+LCx7quqBJKAGp1r7dD4he0BV/ph3pa2SkISfAlFMnzFA7Nd/bueasnbU mMcCp1cgqUjQ7bF3HJLSB7f611EeC1lpBa9KY4WOgF6UcGfHRgyssu6TyiWpyNzGjsOv hlcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CygA8fkyX9qUapamDo8kLl6SKnvu3s33vyLyCbGv8J4=; b=ryr5H8dVR/F7EoI8JstfKX9xbu4Zx9D16e/QcGvsH6wBvbrn9Ws4BXJ/CR0A91fqTI S+RJhLabJCzVUlZYvNSbPJ4Fb68Ocu67Z9H43cG0bChgNmd1kIuDCtqEwvu2nkv4cuLX 1H9uH7YjSV8toorDn+cKU2NlvzfmdOPztAdr/shoAWEo5pEYvmjzf5mszo7cOOcB0QTe WwFqyEcaUh4qS2W5hGuLHIKbucyzuHp1zAzohheuCk0EjEGgg5lu+VuLJUGW23yVlz9Z 3b1vG51CMi9HMtcZ9T4pFTCgL8FckjTe5IJXPSTrZ4aCMRh66dl+Dijp+0bIdvDFWbm0 vUTQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531p8G/P0Poux4rV78uyMGV7blFzrumcKltg9OXBsuT3HSQ3KFQg R4qVaUJJvMGhGMovopF/Vb6jcA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxYX0Wnj33KA4Bo182/UkINaCnurYfV5W/fY+++mF5pg1f9B2uIzV5MHRsEBsHxaBkk5hHihg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1a0e:: with SMTP id s14mr8975338ild.197.1633546073221; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.30] ([207.135.234.126]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s11sm11822284ilv.69.2021.10.06.11.47.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Oct 2021 11:47:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v1 RFC liburing 0/6] Add no libc support for x86-64 arch To: Ammar Faizi , Pavel Begunkov , io-uring Mailing List Cc: Bedirhan KURT , Louvian Lyndal References: <20211006144911.1181674-1-ammar.faizi@students.amikom.ac.id> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2021 12:47:52 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20211006144911.1181674-1-ammar.faizi@students.amikom.ac.id> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 10/6/21 8:49 AM, Ammar Faizi wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This is the v1 of RFC to support build liburing without libc. > > In this RFC, I introduce no libc support for x86-64 arch. Hopefully, > one day we can get support for other architectures as well. > > Motivation: > Currently liburing depends on libc. We want to make liburing can be > built without libc. > > This idea firstly posted as an issue on the liburing GitHub > repository here: https://github.com/axboe/liburing/issues/443 > > The subject of the issue is: "An option to use liburing without libc?". This series seems to be somewhat upside down. You should fix up tests first, then add support for x86-64 nolibc, then enable it. You seem to be doing the opposite? -- Jens Axboe