Hi Richard, On 2025-07-13 16:21:58-0600, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 7/13/25 14:08, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c > > @@ -709,6 +709,10 @@ int run_startup(int min, int max) > > /* checking NULL for argv/argv0, environ and _auxv is not enough, let's > > compare with sbrk(0) or &end */ > > extern char end; > > char *brk = sbrk(0) != (void *)-1 ? sbrk(0) : &end; > > +#if defined(__alpha__) > > + /* the ordering above does not work on an alpha kernel */ > > + brk = NULL; > > +#endif > > The syscall api is different for brk on alpha. > A change to sys_brk or brk in include/nolibc/sys.h is required.
You are referring to osf_brk, right? I think that should work as-is with the current wrappers. On alpha, mm->brk and mm->arg_start are ordered differently from other architectures. Personally I think the nolibc tests are a bit bogus here. Thomas
