From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: Tsukasa OI <research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sim, sim/{m32c,ppc,rl78}: Use getopt_long
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 21:46:33 +0545 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y1lZ3Zt4X/dNjUh/@vapier> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8d3126e7-d6ed-fd03-4956-0226e099ab48@irq.a4lg.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2956 bytes --]
On 26 Oct 2022 19:57, Tsukasa OI wrote:
> On 2022/10/26 17:59, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 25 Oct 2022 06:27, Tsukasa OI wrote:
> >> Because of Binutils/GCC hack, getopt on GNU libc (2.25 or earlier) is
> >> currently unusable on sim, causing a regression on CentOS 7.
> >>
> >> This is caused as follows:
> >>
> >> 1. If HAVE_DECL_GETOPT is defined (getopt with known prototype is
> >> declared), a declaration of getopt in "include/getopt.h" is suppressed.
> >> The author started to define HAVE_DECL_GETOPT in sim with the commit
> >> 340aa4f6872c ("sim: Check known getopt definition existence").
> >> 2. GNU libc (2.25 or earlier)'s <unistd.h> includes <getopt.h> to declare
> >> getopt function (only, not getopt_long or getopt_long_only) but it
> >> causes <unistd.h> to include Binutils/GCC's "include/getopt.h".
> >> 3. If both 1. and 2. are satisfied, despite that <unistd.h> tries to
> >> declare getopt by including <getopt.h>, "include/getopt.h" does not
> >> define one, causing getopt function unusable.
> >>
> >> Getting rid of "include/getopt.h" (e.g. renaming this header file) is the
> >> best solution to avoid hacking but as a short-term solution, this commit
> >> replaces getopt with getopt_long under sim/.
> >> ---
> >> sim/igen/igen.c | 6 ++++--
> >> sim/m32c/main.c | 5 ++++-
> >> sim/ppc/dgen.c | 6 ++++--
> >> sim/ppc/igen.c | 9 ++++++---
> >> sim/rl78/main.c | 4 +++-
> >> 5 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/sim/igen/igen.c b/sim/igen/igen.c
> >> index ba856401fa9..22cfd30ec43 100644
> >> --- a/sim/igen/igen.c
> >> +++ b/sim/igen/igen.c
> >> @@ -989,6 +989,7 @@ main (int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
> >> char *real_file_name = NULL;
> >> int is_header = 0;
> >> int ch;
> >> + struct option dummy_longopts = { 0 };
> >
> > just call it "longopts" so we don't have to rename it in the future if we
> > decide to actually add long options. comes up in the other files too.
> >
> > otherwise lgtm.
> > -mike
>
> To prepare actual long options, not just renaming, making them array of
> struct option seems better. Moving longopts out from the caller is
> avoided for now (since it might not get big so that it requires option
> definition outside a function). That means...
>
> Before: struct option dummy_longopts = { 0 };
> After: struct option longopts[] = { { 0 } };
>
> I fixed like this and I'll submit PATCH v3 (with fix above and minor
> commit message clarification) soon. Finally, I can clean up the mess I
> created.
i would make it static const too in that case so it isn't constructed on
the stack ... it's just part of the rodata and loaded right away.
> Ah, a minor question to you, Mike. Can I consider your "lgtm" as an
> approval for specific area you are responsible?
"lgtm" is equiv to "approved, please push when you're ready"
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-26 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <3b7e769f-b5e9-4049-786f-d00d997f0280@irq.a4lg.com>
2022-10-18 17:13 ` [PATCH] sim, sim/m32c, sim/rl78: " Tsukasa OI
2022-10-21 16:27 ` Tom Tromey
2022-10-24 7:51 ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-25 5:53 ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-25 16:54 ` Tom Tromey
2022-10-25 17:17 ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-25 19:42 ` Tom Tromey
2022-10-25 6:27 ` [PATCH v2] sim, sim/{m32c,ppc,rl78}: " Tsukasa OI
2022-10-26 8:59 ` Mike Frysinger
2022-10-26 10:57 ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-26 16:01 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
2022-10-27 1:29 ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-26 10:59 ` [PATCH v3] " Tsukasa OI
2022-10-27 1:23 ` [PATCH v4] " Tsukasa OI
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y1lZ3Zt4X/dNjUh/@vapier \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).