If we can get a complete list of which files currently have issues I'm thinking that would be an excellent list to mull over during the Christmas break. For those of us who will be "off" we may still want a coding fix for an hour or so. :)
Also it's an excellent way for those on the ODP mailing list who want to "get their hands dirty" with ODP code to tackle something small and focused. Bill On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Mike Holmes <mike.hol...@linaro.org> wrote: > I think adding it explicitly when using the patch checking tool > "apply-and-build.sh" might be a way forward. > > If we can get agreement on C99, then bugzilla already has many of these > bugs listed, > <https://bugs.linaro.org/buglist.cgi?component=General&list_id=3080&product=OpenDataPlane&resolution=---> > including the source of Robbies issue. All we need is agreement that C99 is > our direction and git blame will show us the likely best person to fix each > issue. > > On 9 December 2014 at 12:48, Bill Fischofer <bill.fischo...@linaro.org> > wrote: > >> OK, I understand this is perhaps a longer-term project, but is there a >> file-level way we can enable this check? If yes, then we can ask that as >> part of modules that are currently being patched that c99 checks be >> included in them. That way files will be brought into compliance and then >> stay in compliance after they've been merged. >> >> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Mike Holmes <mike.hol...@linaro.org> >> wrote: >> >>> sorry, I cleaned the history try this: >>> >>> https://ci.linaro.org/view/odp-ci/job/odp-api-check-native-c99/buildhw=x86_64,label=build/16/console >>> >>> On 9 December 2014 at 12:39, Mike Holmes <mike.hol...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Make -k gives the attached so it is easy to look past the first issue. >>>> We cant make it default because everything breaks, we should fix things >>>> and then the CI job which >>>> has been building it this way for a while will eventually pass. If we >>>> can get consensus on linux-generic sticking to to C99 it is worth following >>>> up on this build. >>>> >>>> The builds are for both ARM and X86, I had not been following it >>>> becasue we did not have consensus on the C99 issue: X86 is working but Arm >>>> filesystem needs curl installing. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://ci.linaro.org/view/odp-ci/job/odp-api-check-native-c99/buildhw=x86_64,label=build/14/console >>>> >>>> We dont want to hijack the need to have ./configure check for the >>>> version we are using however. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9 December 2014 at 12:17, Bill Fischofer <bill.fischo...@linaro.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I suggest we turn on that by default. It's the one way to ensure that >>>>> the issues will get fixed. Is this a stop-on-first-error situation or can >>>>> we have it carry on so we get a complete list of what the c99 issues are? >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Mike Holmes <mike.hol...@linaro.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> This might also be the right time to adhere to the use of only C99 in >>>>>> linux-generics implementation ? >>>>>> >>>>>> CFLAGS=-std=c99 ./configure >>>>>> make >>>>>> >>>>>> Throws up other issues, the first is in packet_io >>>>>> >>>>>> mike@fedora1:~/git/odp$ make >>>>>> Making all in platform >>>>>> make[1]: Entering directory '/home/mike/git/odp/platform' >>>>>> Making all in linux-generic >>>>>> make[2]: Entering directory >>>>>> '/home/mike/git/odp/platform/linux-generic' >>>>>> CC odp_packet_io.lo >>>>>> odp_packet_io.c: In function 'odp_pktio_set_mtu': >>>>>> odp_packet_io.c:512:35: error: 'caddr_t' undeclared (first use in >>>>>> this function) >>>>>> ret = ioctl(sockfd, SIOCSIFMTU, (caddr_t)&ifr); >>>>>> ^ >>>>>> odp_packet_io.c:512:35: note: each undeclared identifier is reported >>>>>> only once for each function it appears in >>>>>> Makefile:560: recipe for target 'odp_packet_io.lo' failed >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9 December 2014 at 11:48, Robbie King (robking) <robk...@cisco.com >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> After cloning tip just now, I found that I couldn’t build the fresh >>>>>>> >>>>>>> workspace due to having GCC 4.6.3 (the C11 changes to the atomics >>>>>>> >>>>>>> bumps minimum GCC up to 4.8 as best I can tell). I’m not very >>>>>>> familiar >>>>>>> >>>>>>> with what “./configure” can and can’t do, but it seems we should >>>>>>> verify >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the compiler supports these constructs and fail during the configure >>>>>>> >>>>>>> phase (as opposed to build time). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Robbie >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> lng-odp mailing list >>>>>>> lng-odp@lists.linaro.org >>>>>>> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> *Mike Holmes* >>>>>> Linaro Sr Technical Manager >>>>>> LNG - ODP >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> lng-odp mailing list >>>>>> lng-odp@lists.linaro.org >>>>>> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Mike Holmes* >>>> Linaro Sr Technical Manager >>>> LNG - ODP >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Mike Holmes* >>> Linaro Sr Technical Manager >>> LNG - ODP >>> >> >> > > > -- > *Mike Holmes* > Linaro Sr Technical Manager > LNG - ODP >
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list lng-odp@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
