From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sun Jul 22 22:04:22 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E89A4102F884 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:04:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F260871C4 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:04:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 3FC4C102F883; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:04:21 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E201102F882 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:04:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93D65871C1; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:04:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kib.kiev.ua (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w6MM4DrX048895 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 01:04:16 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua w6MM4DrX048895 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w6MM4DF3048894; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 01:04:13 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 01:04:13 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov To: Li-Wen Hsu Cc: current@freebsd.org, Ruslan Bukin Subject: Re: FreeBSD-head-riscv64-build - Build #9623 (r336573) - Failure Message-ID: <20180722220413.GG65334@kib.kiev.ua> 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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FROM,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on tom.home X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:04:22 -0000 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 > 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.