Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] perf test workload noploop: Name the noploop process

[Ian Rogers]

On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 10:45 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 08:12:47AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 12:36 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > I'm afraid it'd introduce a build failure on musl.  Please see
>
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/20250611092542.F4ooE2FL@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> > > I think <sys/prctl.h> would be enough.
>
> > we could do that but in the glibc man page it says:
> > https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/prctl.2.html
> > ```
> > #include <linux/prctl.h>  /* Definition of PR_* constants */
> > #include <sys/prctl.h>
> > ```
>
> > It'd be nice to think musl was slowly getting fixed. I notice we're
>
> Sebastian reported on the musl libc, its maintainer replied:
>
> https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2025/06/12/11

Ugh. I'm not sure how we're expected to resolve this and have glibc
and musl be happy without basically not trusting libc.

Thanks,
Ian