From: Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org>
To: Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar-dev@posteo.net>
Cc: buildroot@buildroot.org
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/makedumpfile: fix build with musl libc
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:24:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240731122411.01f82c08@windsurf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240731061235.18090-1-egorenar-dev@posteo.net>
Hello Alexander,
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:12:35 +0000
Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar-dev@posteo.net> wrote:
> diff --git a/package/makedumpfile/0003-Fix-build-with-musl-libc.patch b/package/makedumpfile/0003-Fix-build-with-musl-libc.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..26718fb7f6b9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/package/makedumpfile/0003-Fix-build-with-musl-libc.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
> +From 3ae383c5dfdbd4dc5cfb888b3cc187819658068b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> +From: Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar-dev@posteo.net>
> +Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:43:50 +0200
> +Subject: [PATCH 1/1] Fix build with musl libc
> +
> +musl libc defines PAGESIZE in its limits.h header file.
> +
> +Signed-off-by: Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar-dev@posteo.net>
Thanks for your patch. However, we now require all patches to carry an
Upstream: tag that points either to the upstream commit being
backported, or the submission of the patch made to the upstream project
(link to the mailing list archive, link to the pull request, etc.).
This is pointed out by "make check-package".
Could you have a look at submitting this patch upstream, and add the
Upstream: tag?
> +diff --git a/makedumpfile.h b/makedumpfile.h
> +index 6b43a8b44f93..54e894bfee2b 100644
> +--- a/makedumpfile.h
> ++++ b/makedumpfile.h
> +@@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ test_bit(int nr, unsigned long addr)
> + #define PTOB(X) (((unsigned long long)(X)) << PAGESHIFT())
> + #define BTOP(X) (((unsigned long long)(X)) >> PAGESHIFT())
> +
> ++#undef PAGESIZE /* musl's limits.h defines PAGESIZE */
Is this the right thing to do?
> + #define PAGESIZE() (info->page_size)
> + #define PAGESHIFT() (info->page_shift)
These macros that assume "info" is an available variable are anyway
really atrocious :-/
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-31 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-31 6:12 [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/makedumpfile: fix build with musl libc Alexander Egorenkov
2024-07-31 10:24 ` Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240731122411.01f82c08@windsurf \
--to=buildroot@buildroot.org \
--cc=egorenar-dev@posteo.net \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox