[PATCH 7/7] sysv: linux: Add 64-bit time_t variant for shmctl

[Alistair Francis]

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:07 AM Adhemerval Zanella
<adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 01/07/2020 13:35, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 01/07/2020 12:48, Alistair Francis wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:19 AM Adhemerval Zanella
> >> <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 30/06/2020 23:28, Alistair Francis wrote:
> >>> deps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/struct_kernel_shmid64_ds.h b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/struct_kernel_shmid64_ds.h
> >>>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>>> index 0000000000..5533d44dee
> >>>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>>> +++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/struct_kernel_shmid64_ds.h
> >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> >>>>> +/* Analogous to kernel struct shmid64_ds used on shmctl.  */
> >>>>> +struct kernel_shmid64_ds
> >>>>> +{
> >>>>> +  struct ipc_perm shm_perm;
> >>>>> +#if __TIMESIZE == 64
> >>>>> +  long int shm_atime;
> >>>>> +  long int shm_atime;
> >>>>> +  long int shm_atime;
> >>>>
> >>>> This fails to compile as all three variables have the same name.
> >>>
> >>> In fact this code specifically is not used on powerpc since it will
> >>> either use the __TIMESIZE == 32 (powerpc32) or not use this
> >>> structure at all (powerpc64{le}).  But it is still an issue I will
> >>> revise the patch for such issues and remove it (maybe adding a
> >>> #error if it used on powerpc64).
> >>
> >> Ah whoops, I commented inline on the wrong file. The generic one
> >> (sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/struct_kernel_shmid64_ds.h) also has the same
> >> problem which is why I saw the RISC-V build fail.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Besides it, does it work for riscv32 (which should use the default
> >>> definition)?
> >>
> >> This patch doesn't work due to the same name variables in a few places
> >> (one of them being the generic one).
> >>
> >
> > I need to setup an 32-bit ABI with 64-bit time_t to catch these kind of
> > issues.
> >
> >> I am testing all the other patches and should know by tonight (about 8
> >> hours still), I'll let you know.
> >
> > Ack, you can also do a sniff test with the sysvipc tests to check if
> > they are ok.
>
> Ok, the __TIMESIZE should not be used to define the kernel_* struct anyway,
> they should be independent of the glibc time ABI selected or defined by
> the ABI.
>
> I have updated my personal branch [1] with an updated version and I will
> try to check if riscv32 at least built against. If you could also check
> it would be helpful.

Thanks!

I have tested this series with patch 7 (this patch) dropped and it
works for RV32.

>
> [1] https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/azanella/semctl-y2038

I am now running a full test of this branch, unfortunately it'll take
about 24 hours.

Alistair