Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] fhandler/proc.cc: use wincap.has_user_shstk

[Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@Shaw.ca>]

On 2023-06-15 01:11, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> thanks, that looks good, except this single snippet:
> 
> On Jun  7 10:37, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> ---
>>   winsup/cygwin/fhandler/proc.cc | 8 ++++----
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/fhandler/proc.cc b/winsup/cygwin/fhandler/proc.cc
>> index 3c79762e0fbd..2eaf436dc122 100644
>> --- a/winsup/cygwin/fhandler/proc.cc
>> +++ b/winsup/cygwin/fhandler/proc.cc
>> @@ -1486,12 +1486,12 @@ format_proc_cpuinfo (void *, char *&destbuf)
>>   
>>   /*	  ftcprint (features1,  6, "split_lock_detect");*//* MSR_TEST_CTRL split lock */
>>   
>> -      /* cpuid 0x00000007 ecx & Windows [20]20H1/[20]2004+ */
>> -      if (maxf >= 0x00000007 && wincap.osname () >= "10.0"
>> -					 && wincap.build_number () >= 19041)
>> +      /* Windows [20]20H1/[20]2004/19041 user shadow stack */
>> +      if (maxf >= 0x00000007 && wincap.has_user_shstk)
>                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> wincapc::has_user_shstk is a method, accessing the wincaps::has_user_shstk
> member.  The parens are missing.  Consequentially I see an error when
> trying to build it:
> 
>    winsup/cygwin/fhandler/proc.cc:1490:40: error: invalid use of member ‘bool wincapc::has_user_shstk() const’ (did you forget the ‘&’ ?)
>     1490 |       if (maxf >= 0x00000007 && wincap.has_user_shstk)
> 	|                                 ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>    make[4]: *** [Makefile:2068: fhandler/proc.o] Error 1

Sorry - yes - that was a thinko caught by the build, and fixed for a redo before 
testing.
Then I realized I had made the v2 changes after pulling the main branch instead 
of on my local cpuinfo branch, so reset and merged the changes into the 
branches, to put them back to where I thought they should be.
It is likely I either failed to commit or wiped the change, before generating 
patches, as some git operations still rely on SO answers.

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis              Calgary, Alberta, Canada

La perfection est atteinte                   Perfection is achieved
non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter  not when there is no more to add
mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retirer     but when there is no more to cut
                                 -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry