From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Jackson Subject: Re: [PATCH] Android port of intel-gpu-tools Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:03:38 -0500 Message-ID: <4F0C534A.50100@redhat.com> References: <1326170701-22099-1-git-send-email-sateesh.kavuri@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 289379E74C for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:03:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1326170701-22099-1-git-send-email-sateesh.kavuri@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: Sateesh Kavuri Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On 1/9/12 11:45 PM, Sateesh Kavuri wrote: > Added support for Android. Changes include fixes for compilation issues > related to Android using an older version of GCC compiler (ver 4.3.3) > while the latest version of intel-gpu-tools confirms to GCC ver 4.5.2 > (C99 standard functions), using functions like getline(). Fixed such > functions, header dependencies for android and added an Android.mk file. I can understand avoiding C99 functions that android doesn't have, but this kind of thing: > + #ifdef ANDROID > + int i; > + for (i = 1; i< len; i++) { > + #else > for (int i = 1; i< len; i++) { > + #endif is silly. Does gcc -std=c99 on android seriously not cope with this? - ajax