On Sun, Jan 22 2023, Volker Schlecht <openbsd-po...@schlecht.dev> wrote:
> On 1/21/23 19:46, Theo Buehler wrote:
>> To be clear, I'm not excluding that this is part of the solution to the
>> problem. However, with this diff, I see the exact same segfault that I
>> saw without any diff at all, so I do not think we should land this just
>> yet.
>
> I don't have a CPU with the PKU register, and I was using the last amd64
> snapshot that didn't have this enabled as default. With that combination
> it neither crashed, nor showed any of those warnings. Which is expected
> behavior, I guess ...
>
>> My suggestion for a diff that would only affect the troublesome amd64
>> architecture and avoid any possible PIC issues on i386 would be the
>> below:
>
> Tested with the same hardware setup and the latest amd64 snapshot, so
> I couldn't see a crash coming from xonly if there was one. But here it
> works fine, so OK from me.
IIUC tb's diff isn't ready for commit yet since it still results in
a segfault on a PKU-enabled amd64 system.
I do however can confirm that I also need USE_NOEXECONLY to avoid
a segfault on riscv64. This was used in the previous bulk build and
will be needed for the next bulk build too.
ok?
Index: Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/ports/lang/node/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.114
diff -u -p -r1.114 Makefile
--- Makefile 21 Jan 2023 15:48:25 -0000 1.114
+++ Makefile 23 Jan 2023 11:30:08 -0000
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ ONLY_FOR_ARCHS = amd64 aarch64 i386 powe
DPB_PROPERTIES = parallel
USE_WXNEEDED = Yes
-.if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == amd64
+.if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == amd64 || ${MACHINE_ARCH} == riscv64
USE_NOEXECONLY = Yes
.endif
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ PLEDGE_VER = 1.1.3
DISTFILES = node-pledge-{}${PLEDGE_VER}.tar.gz:0 \
${DISTNAME}-headers.tar.gz \
${DISTNAME}.tar.xz
-REVISION = 0
+REVISION = 1
DISTNAME = node-${NODE_VERSION}
PKGNAME = ${DISTNAME:S/v//g}
--
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
