[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openembedded-core
Subject:    Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] glibc: refresh patch to also fix qemuppc
From:       Martin Jansa <martin.jansa () gmail ! com>
Date:       2018-09-29 12:55:58
Message-ID: CA+chaQdqVSwjnhUF0Ysj=-eucw9X14SO1Q0KqRa5zAh4Q-LP-g () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


I'm refreshing the patch based on feedback from upstream, I'll integrate
the changes for ppc as well.

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 2:26 PM Richard Purdie <
richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2018-09-29 at 10:58 +0800, Chen Qi wrote:
> > The patch 0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-maybe-uninitialized-
> > errors.patch
> > did not take into consideration of qemuppc. Refresh it to also fix
> > building for qemuppc.
> >
> > The related error message is like below:
> >
> >   ../sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-128ibm/e_jnl.c:153:20: error: 'temp' may be
> > used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chen Qi <Qi.Chen@windriver.com>
> > ---
> >  ...eee754-prevent-maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch | 41
> > +++++++++++++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-
> > prevent-maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch b/meta/recipes-
> > core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-maybe-uninitialized-
> > errors.patch
> > index b02c4ec..1c5b254 100644
> > --- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-
> > maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch
> > +++ b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-
> > maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch
> > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> > -From c6cc5a6ef46837e341fe271b5ffa6def23810082 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001
> > +From 113241a738662854256c5e2e415397721b842862 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001
> >  From: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
> >  Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 23:23:03 +0000
> >  Subject: [PATCH] sysdeps/ieee754: prevent maybe-uninitialized errors
> > @@ -21,13 +21,14 @@ Upstream-Status: Submitted [https://www.sourcewar
> > e.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-09/msg
>
> I get nervous when we modify a patch submitted upstream. Was the patch
> submitted accepted? Do we need to send this other piece upstream?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr">I&#39;m refreshing the patch based on feedback from upstream, I&#39;ll \
integrate the changes for ppc as well.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div \
dir="ltr">On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 2:26 PM Richard Purdie &lt;<a \
href="mailto:richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org">richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; \
wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Sat, 2018-09-29 at 10:58 +0800, \
Chen Qi wrote:<br> &gt; The patch \
0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-maybe-uninitialized-<br> &gt; errors.patch<br>
&gt; did not take into consideration of qemuppc. Refresh it to also fix<br>
&gt; building for qemuppc.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; The related error message is like below:<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt;     ../sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-128ibm/e_jnl.c:153:20: error: &#39;temp&#39; may \
be<br> &gt; used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Signed-off-by: Chen Qi &lt;<a href="mailto:Qi.Chen@windriver.com" \
target="_blank">Qi.Chen@windriver.com</a>&gt;<br> &gt; ---<br>
&gt;   ...eee754-prevent-maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch | 41<br>
&gt; +++++++++++++++++-----<br>
&gt;   1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-<br>
&gt; prevent-maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch b/meta/recipes-<br>
&gt; core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-maybe-uninitialized-<br>
&gt; errors.patch<br>
&gt; index b02c4ec..1c5b254 100644<br>
&gt; --- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-<br>
&gt; maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch<br>
&gt; +++ b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0031-sysdeps-ieee754-prevent-<br>
&gt; maybe-uninitialized-errors.patch<br>
&gt; @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@<br>
&gt; -From c6cc5a6ef46837e341fe271b5ffa6def23810082 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00<br>
&gt; 2001<br>
&gt; +From 113241a738662854256c5e2e415397721b842862 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00<br>
&gt; 2001<br>
&gt;   From: Martin Jansa &lt;<a href="mailto:Martin.Jansa@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">Martin.Jansa@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br> &gt;   Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 \
23:23:03 +0000<br> &gt;   Subject: [PATCH] sysdeps/ieee754: prevent \
maybe-uninitialized errors<br> &gt; @@ -21,13 +21,14 @@ Upstream-Status: Submitted \
[<a href="https://www.sourcewar" rel="noreferrer" \
target="_blank">https://www.sourcewar</a><br> &gt; <a \
href="http://e.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-09/msg" rel="noreferrer" \
target="_blank">e.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-09/msg</a><br> <br>
I get nervous when we modify a patch submitted upstream. Was the patch<br>
submitted accepted? Do we need to send this other piece upstream?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Richard<br>
<br>
-- <br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Openembedded-core mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org" \
target="_blank">Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org</a><br> <a \
href="http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core" \
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core</a><br>
 </blockquote></div>



-- 
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic