Re: FreeBSD-head-riscv64-build - Build #9623 (r336573) - Failure

From: Li-Wen Hsu <lwhsu_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:39:08 +0100
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:27 PM Konstantin Belousov
<kostikbel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 06:16:02PM +0100, Li-Wen Hsu wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 18:45:05 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 01:01:16AM +0000, Li-Wen Hsu wrote:
> > > Well, the arch(7) manpage documents __riscv__.   Compilers typically
> > > provide both __XXX__ and __XXX, while FreeBSD traditionally uses
> > > the __XXX__ form.
> >
> > Please check r322168, __riscv__ is replaced by __riscv and
> > __riscv64 is replaced by (__riscv && __riscv_xlen == 64).  Details are
> > in the commit message.
> >
> > Alghough I grep'd sys/ and there are some __riscv__ still existing:
> >
> > sys/vm/vm_unix.c:72:#if !defined(__aarch64__) && !defined(__riscv__)
> > sys/vm/vm_unix.c:81:#else /* defined(__aarch64__) || defined(__riscv__) */
> > sys/vm/vm_unix.c:83:#endif /* defined(__aarch64__) || defined(__riscv__) */
> >
> > I guess those also need changing, as well as arch(7)
> >
> >
> > > With that change, I think that your patch should go in regardless of
> > > the second issue below.
> >
> > Thanks, please commit or approve it.
> Why do you need an approval ?  I already said that your patch looks fine.

Oh, I did not realize that means a green light.  Also I am not sure
about your opinion of __riscv and __riscv__.  Does my original patch
look OK to you?

-- 
Li-Wen Hsu <lwhsu_at_FreeBSD.org>
https://lwhsu.org
Received on Sun Jul 22 2018 - 20:33:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:17 UTC