This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc 2.31: hard freeze on Friday, 31st Jan
- From: Romain Naour <romain dot naour at gmail dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
- Cc: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at gotplt dot org>, GLIBC Devel <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, alistair23 <alistair23 at gmail dot com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 12:20:53 +0100
- Subject: Re: glibc 2.31: hard freeze on Friday, 31st Jan
- References: <78730bb4-4c3f-2cc6-bbdc-40ef1acfda27@gotplt.org> <19bcbe8f-8243-b98c-562d-aa0c19aa2ef2@gmail.com> <87k1563spz.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
Hi Florian,
Le 01/02/2020 à 22:25, Florian Weimer a écrit :
> * Romain Naour:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Le 30/01/2020 à 16:15, Siddhesh Poyarekar a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> It looks like testing during freeze has gone without incident and we're
>>> nearing the release date. I'll begin release testing tomorrow, so
>>> please do not commit anything after Friday noon UTC. That is, even if I
>>> approve your patch for master and it fails to go in before noon UTC
>>> tomorrow, it will have to wait until master reopens. NEWS patches are
>>> an exception of course; I'll just fix up and commit if they are not
>>> pushed in time when I review changes for more newsworthy items.
>>>
>>> If everything goes to plan, I will have finished release testing and cut
>>> a release by Saturday night.
>>
>> The risc64 port needs at least a kernel headers >= 5.0
>>
>> Otherwise glibc fail to build with:
>>
>> ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/riscv/rv64/arch-syscall.h:193:33: error: expected
>> declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant
>> 193 | #define __NR_riscv_flush_icache 259
>> | ^~~
>> In file included from ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/riscv/flush-icache.c:25:
>> /home/naourr/buildroot/test/toolchain/host/riscv64-buildroot-linux-gnu/sysroot/usr/include/asm/syscalls.h:29:36:
>> error: unknown type name 'sys_riscv_flush_icache'
>> 29 | __SYSCALL(__NR_riscv_flush_icache, sys_riscv_flush_icache)
>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> See: https://gitlab.com/kubu93/toolchains-builder/-/jobs/422726962
>
> This is quite ocnfusing. Why doesn't expand __SYSCALL to nothing in
> this context?
>
> Ah, I see, this header wasn't originally written as a UAPI header.
> Can you test if it works to drop these lines?
>
> #if __has_include (<asm/syscalls.h>)
> # include <asm/syscalls.h>
> #else
> # include <asm/unistd.h>
> #endif
>
> Including <sys/syscall.h> should now be sufficient.
>
Indeed it is sufficient to fix this issue.
Thanks!
Best regards,
Romain