Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 01:04:13 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Li-Wen Hsu <lwhsu@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org, Ruslan Bukin <br@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD-head-riscv64-build - Build #9623 (r336573) - Failure Message-ID: <20180722220413.GG65334@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <CAKBkRUzRUdNLP6oWZc_DaySX-w7sPFv_qhBk_cWkmR-DtGun4A@mail.gmail.com> References: <941706773.1.1532139392496.JavaMail.jenkins@jenkins.ci.freebsd.org> <20180721231832.GC65334@kib.kiev.ua> <20180722010116.GA13419@freefall.freebsd.org> <20180722154505.GE65334@kib.kiev.ua> <20180722171601.GA25771@x1c.lwhsu.org> <20180722212655.GF65334@kib.kiev.ua> <CAKBkRUzRUdNLP6oWZc_DaySX-w7sPFv_qhBk_cWkmR-DtGun4A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:39:08PM +0100, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:27 PM Konstantin Belousov > <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 06:16:02PM +0100, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 18:45:05 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 01:01:16AM +0000, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > > > > Well, the arch(7) manpage documents __riscv__. Compilers typically > > > > provide both __XXX__ and __XXX, while FreeBSD traditionally uses > > > > the __XXX__ form. > > > > > > Please check r322168, __riscv__ is replaced by __riscv and > > > __riscv64 is replaced by (__riscv && __riscv_xlen == 64). Details are > > > in the commit message. > > > > > > Alghough I grep'd sys/ and there are some __riscv__ still existing: > > > > > > sys/vm/vm_unix.c:72:#if !defined(__aarch64__) && !defined(__riscv__) > > > sys/vm/vm_unix.c:81:#else /* defined(__aarch64__) || defined(__riscv__) */ > > > sys/vm/vm_unix.c:83:#endif /* defined(__aarch64__) || defined(__riscv__) */ > > > > > > I guess those also need changing, as well as arch(7) > > > > > > > > > > With that change, I think that your patch should go in regardless of > > > > the second issue below. > > > > > > Thanks, please commit or approve it. > > Why do you need an approval ? I already said that your patch looks fine. > > Oh, I did not realize that means a green light. Also I am not sure > about your opinion of __riscv and __riscv__. Does my original patch > look OK to you? The change to __riscv looks strange. At least arch(7) should be updated, but this also contradicts the usual syntax. Anyway, I do not have an opinion there, perhaps use __riscv since this apparently is what Ruslan wants to use.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20180722220413.GG65334>