armhf linux build fails "tinygo test os" in TestDirFS?

[dankegel]

trafficstars

On raspberry pi 4 64 bits, I installed https://github.com/tinygo-org/tinygo/releases/download/v0.23.0/tinygo_0.23.0_armhf.deb (and the right libc++, see #2815 ) and go 1.17, and ran "tinygo test os".

The test fails with

--- FAIL: TestDirFS (0.00s)
    TestFS found errors:
        b: failed TestReader:
        	Seek(0, 1) from EOF = 0, operation not supported, want 0, nil
        dir/x: failed TestReader:
        	Seek(0, 1) from EOF = 0, operation not supported, want 0, nil
        a: failed TestReader:
        	Seek(0, 1) from EOF = 0, operation not supported, want 0, nil
    FailNow is incomplete, requires runtime.Goexit()

Same result with go 1.18 (with the fixed tinygo binary from #2823).

[QuLogic]

This also fails on i686, so seems like maybe a 32-bit problem in general?

[QuLogic]

In os_test.go, I see

func TestSeek(t *testing.T) {
        if runtime.GOARCH == "386" || runtime.GOARCH == "arm" {
                t.Log("TODO: implement seek for 386 and arm")
                return
        }

so this probably needs to be translated into TestFS as well, but I don't think there's a copy of it in tinygo that can be patched.

[QuLogic]

I also see

--- FAIL: TestSymlink (0.00s)
    TestFS found errors:
        hello: failed TestReader:
        	Seek(0, 1) from EOF = 0, operation not supported, want 13, nil
        hello.link: failed TestReader:
        	Seek(0, 1) from EOF = 0, operation not supported, want 13, nil
    FailNow is incomplete, requires runtime.Goexit()
FAIL

but this one I cannot figure how to get from TestSymlink to a Seek.

[QuLogic]

Ah, the latter is from testing/fstest; I worked around that by skipping it on i686.

[deadprogram]

Now that we have 64-bit ARM Linux build, it this still a problem?

[dankegel]

Well... Yeah, it's still a problem for 32 bit systems, and will be until tinygo supports go's assembly implementation of seek, https://github.com/golang/go/blob/master/src/syscall/asm_linux_arm.s

[dankegel]

Skipping particular tests on affected systems using build tags might be a fine bandaid. I dunno why I didn't do that when I was fleshing out tinygo's is package, guess I was lazy

[aykevl]

This will be fixed by #3103.