Re: Potential glibc 2.43 regression on big-endian targets
Sam James <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha,gmane.linux.debian.ports.powerpc,gmane.linux.debian.ports.sparc |
|---|---|
| Organization | Gentoo |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <[email protected]> writes: > Hi, > > On Sun, 2026-08-23 at 06:51 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> On Sat, 2026-08-22 at 16:23 -0300, Adhemerval Zanella Netto wrote: >> > I run tests on powerpc64/powerpc32 from time to time on cfarm121 and I haven't >> > see any other than the usual regressions [1][2]. Did it started with 2.43? >> >> Yes, I'm quite confident that it started with 2.43. > > I just noticed the following message on the kernel buffer, it might be related: > > [ 1814.130181] cgroup: fork rejected by pids controller in /system.slice/cron.service I am not seeing this yet. This sounds a bit like some system-wide limits gone haywire? https://serverfault.com/questions/1032747/cgroup-fork-rejected-by-pids-controller mentions something like it too. > > Adrian sam
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 418 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEBBAEWCgCpFiEEJaa7iN2bdkxrVUHCc4QJ9SDfkZAFAmqKj2sbFIAAAAAABAAO bWFudTIsMi41KzEuMTIsMiwyXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25z Lm9wZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQyNUE2QkI4OEREOUI3NjRDNkI1NTQx QzI3Mzg0MDlGNTIwREY5MTkwDxxzYW1AZ2VudG9vLm9yZwAKCRBzhAn1IN+RkIVA AP9kwWy6YJHFqxzKiB9N2By9usVrk0Amf2c3b1qtlUVnQQEAtpy43soQPmEREtuH zMZ+Wjw0XyciSchkr0EjKnbShAQ= =HzwO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----