[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] hurd: Add shared mig declarations
From: |
Simon Marchi |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] hurd: Add shared mig declarations |
Date: |
Sun, 31 May 2020 22:05:45 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1 |
On 2020-05-31 3:20 a.m., Samuel Thibault wrote:
> 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.
> ”
Thanks, that sounds good. And this way, I suppose that if for some reason the
prototypes
don't match, we'll get a compilation error (which is a good thing).
>> 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).
Ok.
Simon