Hi again Cliff, Have you made any progress on this? Cheers, Frase
On 30/01/14 02:31, Cliff Jansen wrote:
Well thanks for all that. I'll certainly take another look and report back before committing anything. Giving a compiler family indigestion is certainly to be avoided. Cliff On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Fraser Adams <fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:Hi, me again Cliff. I've only had time to recheck this against my test case, which is representative of what I see for real. Doing: int pn_data_vfill2(const char *fmt, va_list ap) { // Process the PROPERTIES constant - this seems OK uint64_t prop = va_arg(ap, uint64_t); printf("prop = %llu\n", prop); { pn_bytes_t bytes = va_arg(ap, pn_bytes_t); printf("pn_data_vfill z, bytes.size = %zu, bytes.start = %s\n", bytes.size, bytes.start); } // Process the char* returned by pn_string_get() { char *start = va_arg(ap, char *); size_t size = strlen(start); printf("pn_data_vfill size = %zu\n", size); printf("pn_data_vfill string = %s\n", start); } return 0; } E.g. the both passing and retrieving structs approach of your second approach actually doesn't even compile for me with LLVM le32, I get error: cannot compile this aggregate va_arg expression yet pn_bytes_t bytes = va_arg(ap, pn_bytes_t); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /home/fadams/emscripten/system/include/libc/stdarg.h:15:25: note: expanded from macro 'va_arg' #define va_arg(v,l) __builtin_va_arg(v,l) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1 error generated. ERROR root: compiler frontend failed to generate LLVM bitcode, halting make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/test_varargs.dir/test_varargs.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/test_varargs.dir/all] Error 2 make: *** [all] Error 2 Though it *does* work if I do "EMCC_LLVM_TARGET=i386-pc-linux-gnu make" So in a nutshell: 1) if I fudge the LLVM front end pure struct, put struct retrieve discrete and pure discrete values all work correctly. 2) with the standard emscripten le32 LLVM front end (which is what is recommended) * pure struct (as above) fails to compile * put struct, retrieve discrete (as with the original Proton code) gives the wrong results - that messed with my head :-) * pure discrete values (as with your pn_string_size(msg->user_id), pn_string_get(msg->user_id),) patch works correctly. So I'd *really* like it if you could go down the path of your original patch 'cause that would fix what you've been seeing and let me compile the JavaScript stuff without needing the environment tweaked (which is an accident waiting to happen). I hope that you are agreeable to that? I think that it would probably be worth putting a comment in the call to pn_data_fill and within the pn_data_vfill() 'z' case body to document that it's safer to pass individual entries to va_arg to avoid upsetting some compilers - it's not entirely an *obvious* thing really :-D Cheers, Frase On 27/01/14 21:21, Cliff Jansen wrote:Thanks for the Javascript related info. Fraser: can you test if the review board patch (with the struct "in and out" strategy) works in your case with the unhacked llvm setup? If that works then I'll go ahead and check it in. If it fails, please try the first patch. If that works, we will just have to conclude that compilers have trouble with stucts in this case and fall back to passing the two basic types. That should be safe to work in the greatest number of cases. Many thanks. On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Fraser Adams (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> wrote:[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-488?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13883314#comment-13883314 ] Fraser Adams commented on PROTON-488: ------------------------------------- Oh to be clear either "struct in and out", or "separate size_t and char* in and out" what I meant in my previous comment was that the separate size_t and char* in and out is what LLVM le32 is happiest with, the structs seem to confuse it, I hadn't realised that you'd changed your original patch to now do "all 'z' encodings to be passed as a single pn_bytes_t struct and "retrieved" as a single pn_bytes_t struct" - although this arguably looks neater I'd definitely prefer your first approach.Windows 7 64-bit VS2010 qpid-proton Crash on Startup with Send / Recv Application --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: PROTON-488 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-488 Project: Qpid Proton Issue Type: Bug Components: proton-c Affects Versions: 0.6 Environment: Windows 7 64-bit VS 2010 Reporter: Frank Quinn Assignee: Cliff Jansen Priority: Critical Attachments: PROTON-488-0.patch, qpid-proton-win64-send-crash.png Steps to recreate: 1. Grab latest 0.6 tarball 2. Start up Visual Studio x64 Win64 Command Prompt (2010) and run "cmake ." to generate the visual studio files 3. Open Up the newly created Proton.sln in VS2010, right click on qpid-proton and add the path to python to executable directories 4. In the configuration manager, select qpid-proton and select active configuration to be Debug, then select "Add" to add x64 support, copying win32 configuration in the process. 5. Select qpid-proton properties and remove the hard coded /machine:X86 extra command lines in Linker -> Command Line (MACHINE:X64 should already be in the command line above so no need to add here) 6. Right click on qpid-proton and select build Repeat steps 3-6 for send / recv applications. When you run recv, then run send, you'll get a crash with the (soon to be attached) trace. Cheers, Frank-- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.1.5#6160)
