On Fri, Jun 18 2021, Eric Farman <far...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 14:46 +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 18 2021, Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Jun 18 2021, Eric Farman <far...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>> > > +/* format-0 extended-status word */
>> > > +typedef struct ESW {
>> > > + uint32_t word0;
>> > > + uint32_t erw;
>> > > + uint64_t f_addr; /* Zeros for other ESW formats */
>> > > + uint32_t s_addr; /* Zeros for other ESW formats */
>> > > +} QEMU_PACKED ESW;
>> >
>> > Eww, this fails with mingw:
>> > https://gitlab.com/cohuck/qemu/-/jobs/1358335494
>> > In file included from /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-
>> > root/mingw/include/winsock2.h:54,
>> > from /builds/cohuck/qemu/include/sysemu/os-
>> > win32.h:29,
>> > from /builds/cohuck/qemu/include/qemu/osdep.h:135,
>> > from ../hw/s390x/virtio-ccw-gpu.c:11:
>> > /builds/cohuck/qemu/include/hw/s390x/ioinst.h:131:13: error:
>> > expected ':', ',', ';', '}' or '__attribute__' before '.' token
>> > 131 | uint32_t s_addr; /* Zeros for other ESW formats */
>> > | ^~~~~~
>>
>> It seems to be the name that is tripping it; if I rename it to
>> sec_addr
>> and the preceding field to fail_addr, the build passes.
>
> I was just wondering if it might have been the underscore directly, not
> that it was a single letter before the underscore. Weird.
>
>>
>> Anyone know why that is? And if renaming is unavoidable, are
>> fail_addr
>> and sec_addr ok, or can we find better names?
>
> Since they're zero for Format-!0 ESWs, and regardless we don't fill
> them in anyway, could we just make them wordN and change the comment to
> give the descriptive name?
>
> /* format-0 extended-status word */
> typedef struct ESW {
> - uint32_t
> word0;
> + uint32_t word0; /* subchannel logout for format 0 */
>
> uint32_t erw;
> - uint64_t f_addr; /* Zeros for other ESW formats */
> - uint32_t s_addr; /* Zeros for other ESW formats */
> + uint64_t
> word2; /* failing-storage address for format 0 */
> + uint32_t
> word4; /* scondary-CCW address for format 0 */
> } QEMU_PACKED ESW;
>
Yeah, that looks even better.
I can change that myself, will push out to test.
