From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <systemtap-return-25810-listarch-systemtap=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 73676 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2017 01:08:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <systemtap.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:systemtap-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:systemtap@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:systemtap-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 73643 invoked by uid 48); 11 Dec 2017 01:08:22 -0000
From: "mysecondaccountabc at gmail dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug runtime/22572] systemtap 3.2 failed to compile on ARM
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 01:08:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: systemtap
X-Bugzilla-Component: runtime
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mysecondaccountabc at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: systemtap at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-22572-6586-bweNk4S9de@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-22572-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-22572-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2017-q4/txt/msg00184.txt.bz2

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D22572

--- Comment #7 from Gustavo Moreira <mysecondaccountabc at gmail dot com> -=
--
(In reply to Torsten.Polle from comment #5)
> Hi,
>=20
> I had a similar problem with gcc 4.5.2 and fixed it as follows.
>=20
> --------------------------------- staptree.h
> ----------------------------------
> index a376a43..d1e2da4 100644
> @@ -519,9 +519,9 @@ struct print_format: public expression
>      unsigned width;
>      unsigned precision;
>      unsigned flags : 8;
> -    width_type widthtype : 8;
> -    precision_type prectype : 8;
> -    conversion_type type : 8;
> +    unsigned char widthtype : 8;
> +    unsigned char prectype : 8;
> +    unsigned char type : 8;
>      interned_string literal_string;
>      bool is_empty() const
>      {
>=20
> Additionally, I build staprun for an ARM target with
> arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi-gcc (crosstool-NG 1.12.1 - buildroot 2011.08)
> 4.4.3. Here I need an additional patch.
>=20
> Hack: std::string is missing.
>=20=20=20=20=20
> Provide std::string as part of util.h as it missing in string.h.
>=20
> ------------------------------------ util.h
> ------------------------------------
> index e642c5e..e4fdae4 100644
> @@ -144,6 +144,15 @@ inline std::string lex_cast(IN const & in)
>=20=20
>  #if __cplusplus < 201103L
>  // Older C++0x only had the "long long" implementations, so we cast up.
> +#  if (__GNUC__ =3D=3D 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ =3D=3D 4)
> +namespace std {
> +    static std::string to_string(size_t n) {
> +        std::ostringstream s;
> +        s << n;
> +        return s.str();
> +    }
> +}
> +#  endif
>  #define INT_TO_STRING(IN) \
>    LEX_CAST_TO_STRING(signed IN, long long) \
>    LEX_CAST_TO_STRING(unsigned IN, unsigned long long)
>=20
>=20
> Kind Regards,
> Torsten

Thanks Torsten, awesome.=20

I wonder why it's failing, because it's not due to the CXX11's "Strongly-ty=
ped
enums" feature. Actually, I've tested it separately and this feature works =
with
G++ 4.7 (have a look to my response to David@). It seems to be failing insi=
de
STL.=20

PS: The 8bit bit-field is redundant for char type, but yeah it doesn't hurt=
 ;)

Thanks again,
Gus

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.