On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 12:16:49AM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 07.03.2011 um 10:56 schrieb Aurelien Jarno: > > >On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 01:34:10AM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote: > >>v5: > >>* Initial. > >> > >>Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > >>Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <andreas.faer...@web.de> > >>--- > >>fpu/softfloat.c | 132 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>+--------------------------- > >>fpu/softfloat.h | 34 +++++++-------- > >>2 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 84 deletions(-) > > >>diff --git a/fpu/softfloat.h b/fpu/softfloat.h > >>index c599cc2..4c64d77 100644 > >>--- a/fpu/softfloat.h > >>+++ b/fpu/softfloat.h > > >>@@ -394,10 +392,10 @@ INLINE float32 float32_set_sign(float32 a, > >>int sign) > >>*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ > >>int_fast16_t float64_to_int16_round_to_zero( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>uint_fast16_t float64_to_uint16_round_to_zero( float64 > >>STATUS_PARAM ); > >>-int32 float64_to_int32( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>-int32 float64_to_int32_round_to_zero( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>-uint32 float64_to_uint32( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>-uint32 float64_to_uint32_round_to_zero( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>+int_fast32_t float64_to_int32( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>+int_fast32_t float64_to_int32_round_to_zero( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>+uint_fast32_t float64_to_uint32( float64 STATUS_PARAM ); > >>+uint_fast32_t float64_to_uint32_round_to_zero( float64 > >>STATUS_PARAM ); > > > >If you do such a change in the declaration, you should do the same in > >the code, otherwise it doesn't compile... > > Hrm, are you saying this is missing in 08/10, or would you like to > see that squashed into this one? > It did compile at some point, at least before I reordered patches. >
You should not break bisect, so if you change the declaration in a patch, you should also change the corresponding code in the same patch. My guess is that you are using a 32-bit system, so int_fast32_t is the same size as a int. On my system int_fast32_t is equivalent to int64_t so it doesn't compile. That's why I don't think it's a good idea to use fast types. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
