[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] hurd: Add shared mig declarations
From: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] hurd: Add shared mig declarations |
Date: |
Sun, 31 May 2020 09:20:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) |
Simon Marchi, le sam. 30 mai 2020 21:51:35 -0400, a ecrit:
> On 2020-05-30 2:23 p.m., Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Fixes
> >
> > exc_request_S.c:177:24: error: no previous declaration for ‘exc_server’
> > [-Werror=missing-declarations]
> > 177 | mig_external boolean_t exc_server
> >
> > gdb/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * config/i386/i386gnu.mn [%_S.o %_U.o] (COMPILE.post): Add
> > "-include gnu-nat-mig.h".
> > * gnu-nat-mig.h: New file.
> > * gnu-nat.c: Include "gnu-nat-mig.h".
> > (exc_server, msg_reply_server, notify_server,
> > process_reply_server): Remove declarations.
>
> It took me a while to understand the underlying problem. My understanding is
> that
> gnu-nat.c calls this function exc_server, that is defined in the generated
> file. The
> generated file does not provide a header with declarations, so gnu-nat.c had
> its own
> local declaration. Since we now use the -Wmissing-declarations warning flag,
> and the
> definition in the generated exc_request_S.c didn't see a corresponding
> declaration,
> it caused that build failure. Is that correct? If so, please add that
> explanation
> or equivalent to the commit log.
I have now added
“
We are using -Werror=missing-declarations, and the _S.h files generated
by mig do not currently include a declaration for the server routine.
gnu-nat.c used to have its own external declarations, but better just
share them between gnu-nat.c and the _S.c files.
”
> My question now is: that MIG tool appears to generate both a header (%_S.h)
> and source
> file (%_S.c) from defs files. What is this header file used for, if it
> doesn't contain
> the declaration for the functions in the source file?
Mig does include declarations for the functions of the .c files, but
not for the server routine, I don't know why that was never implemented
there (this hasn't been touched since the VCS initial import).
Samuel