From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from loongson.cn (mail.loongson.cn [114.242.206.163]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 935753858D37 for ; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 12:03:44 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 935753858D37 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=loongson.cn Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=loongson.cn Received: from loongson.cn (unknown [10.20.4.187]) by gateway (Coremail) with SMTP id _____8BxEJWfwCpkLwwWAA--.34051S3; Mon, 03 Apr 2023 20:03:43 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.20.4.187] (unknown [10.20.4.187]) by localhost.localdomain (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf8Bxab2ewCpk1WoUAA--.16362S3; Mon, 03 Apr 2023 20:03:42 +0800 (CST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Modify some member names in mcontext_t and ucontext_t structs to align them with the kernel. From: caiyinyu To: Xi Ruoyao , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Cc: adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org, Chenghua Xu , =?UTF-8?B?546L5rSq6JmO?= , lixing@loongson.cn, wuxiaotian@loongson.cn References: <20230324062510.1812367-1-caiyinyu@loongson.cn> <20f7a4ae22c57c2b0f9324e1ac780d353ee0b022.camel@xry111.site> Message-ID: <34690a1b-8a20-ff59-87ef-e4878c5f0799@loongson.cn> Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2023 20:03:42 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux mips64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-CM-TRANSID:AQAAf8Bxab2ewCpk1WoUAA--.16362S3 X-CM-SenderInfo: 5fdl5xhq1xqz5rrqw2lrqou0/ X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uk129KBjvJXoWxJrWxurW3Aw1kGw13KryrCrg_yoW8CF1UpF 10ya48KrWY93W8WryUJ34jq345WryrG3WDJr1aka4UArWUCasFqrW2vr1Y9r17Zw48Wr1Y yrW7Jr1UZa48JaDanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUj1kv1TuYvTs0mT0YCTnIWj qI5I8CrVACY4xI64kE6c02F40Ex7xfYxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT9fnUUIcSsGvfJTRUUU bIxYFVCjjxCrM7AC8VAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1l1xkIjI8I6I8E6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Wr0E3s 1l1IIY67AEw4v_Jr0_Jr4l8cAvFVAK0II2c7xJM28CjxkF64kEwVA0rcxSw2x7M28EF7xv wVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUCVW8JwA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVWUJVW8JwA2z4 x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26r4UJVWxJr1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26r4UJVWxJr1l e2I262IYc4CY6c8Ij28IcVAaY2xG8wAqjxCEc2xF0cIa020Ex4CE44I27wAqx4xG64xvF2 IEw4CE5I8CrVC2j2WlYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2jsIE14v26r4j6F4U McvjeVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvEwIxGrwCYjI0SjxkI62AI1cAE67vIY487Mx AIw28IcxkI7VAKI48JMxC20s026xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UMI8I3I0E5I8CrVAFwI0_Jr0_ Jr4lx2IqxVCjr7xvwVAFwI0_JrI_JrWlx4CE17CEb7AF67AKxVWUAVWUtwCIc40Y0x0EwI xGrwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1j6r1xMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVWUJVW8 JwCI42IY6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI0_Gr0_Cr1lIxAIcV C2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW8JVW8JrUvcSsGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7IU82-e7UUUUU== X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: 在 2023/4/3 下午6:45, caiyinyu 写道: > > 在 2023/4/3 下午6:12, Xi Ruoyao 写道: >> On Mon, 2023-04-03 at 17:41 +0800, caiyinyu wrote: >> >>>> Give me several hours trying to make the anonymous union work.  I see >>>> similar things in other ports' mcontext_t definition so I guess I can >>>> make it work... >> I tried this (w/o __extension__: anyway we are already using "zero- >> length array" which is an extension, and -pedantic should not send alarm >> for system headers): >> >> typedef struct mcontext_t >> { >>    union >>      { >>        struct >>          { >>       unsigned long long __ctx(sc_pc); >>       unsigned long long __ctx(sc_regs)[32]; >>       unsigned int __ctx(sc_flags); >>       unsigned long long __ctx(sc_extcontext)[0] >> __attribute__((__aligned__(16))); >>     }; >>        struct >>          { >>       unsigned long long __pc; >>       unsigned long long __gregs[32]; >>       unsigned int __flags; >>       unsigned long long __extcontext[0] >> __attribute__((__aligned__(16))); >>          }; >>      }; >> } mcontext_t; >> >> There is no conformance test failing.  Can you try this?  If there is >> still conformance test failing please send me the error message so I can >> know why it fails. > > Results: all conform tests passed. > > XPASS: conform/UNIX98/ndbm.h/linknamespace > XPASS: conform/XOPEN2K/ndbm.h/linknamespace > XPASS: conform/XOPEN2K8/ndbm.h/linknamespace > XPASS: conform/XPG42/ndbm.h/linknamespace > Summary of test results: >    1049 PASS >      10 XFAIL >       4 XPASS > > My bad. I stoped at testing your plan without the "__extension__". > > New patch: https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2023-April/146897.html > >>