This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the newlib project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RTEMS Targets Issue #2 - ftello()/fseeko()

On 03/20/2016 07:35 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 19 22:35, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
On 2016-03-19 12:10, Joel Sherrill wrote:
We have a few files which get warnings because
ftello() and/or fseeko() are not prototyped.
These were protected by:

#if !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__) || defined(__USE_XOPEN2K)
Note that __USE_* is the glibc form of the internal macros, where newlib has
(even prior to my changes) used the BSD form __*_VISIBLE.  So this was wrong
to start with.

But now have:


The RTEMS fseeko() test does not explicitly define
__USE_XOPEN2K so I am guessing it was implicit before.

Does the newlib guard need tinkering, the RTEMS default
features, or the test code in RTEMS?
feature_test_macros(7) says that _XOPEN_SOURCE>= 500 includes these two
largefile functions implicitly, but fseeko(3) says they are also
POSIX.1-2001.  Does changing the guard to:


fix this issue?
Hacking on an installed header to use this and I didn't
get a warning.
glibc's fseeko/ftello man page claims this guard:

    _FILE_OFFSET_BITS == 64 || _POSIX_C_SOURCE>= 200112L ||
    _XOPEN_SOURCE>= 600
    (defining the obsolete _LARGEFILE_SOURCE macro also works)

Note especially the _FILE_OFFSET_BITS == 64.  So fseeko/ftello are
always defined on systems with sizeof(off_t) == 8.

If someone turns that into the conditional, I will test it also.
But it looks like it should work also. Or commit something
and I will rebuild tools and do a clean test sweep.

I need to double check but the only other issues I think I am
seeing are:

+ binutils master has an ld issue on v850
+ epiphany's machine/stdlib.h includes its own unique versions
   of a couple of random methods. We want to turn them off for
   at least RTEMS. They are an incomplete set and make a single
   target inconsistent with the rest of our targets.

diff --git a/newlib/libc/machine/epiphany/machine/stdlib.h b/newlib/libc/machine
index 95b4063..7ede4dd 100644
--- a/newlib/libc/machine/epiphany/machine/stdlib.h
+++ b/newlib/libc/machine/epiphany/machine/stdlib.h
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+#ifndef __rtems__
 static __inline__ long int
 random (void)
@@ -13,3 +14,4 @@ srandom (unsigned int seed)

   srand (seed);

Is this patch OK? If so, I will post it formally with a comment.



-- Joel Sherrill
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS
Support and Training Available

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]