Re: [PATCH 0 of 4] [kvm-userspace][test] consolidate test libs to libcflat

[Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>]

Jerone Young wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-07-05 at 12:28 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Jerone Young wrote:
>>     
>>> On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 16:24 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> Jerone Young wrote:
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>>>> This set of patches are to consolidate test libraries into a single 
>>>>>> library archive. This lib archive is libcflat. This will allow common 
>>>>>> code to be shared among archs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>             
>>>>> Applied all, thanks.  I squashed together 1-3 as Hollis suggested, and 
>>>>> with git's rename detection, one can see that you merged exit() puts() 
>>>>> etc into a single file.  That usually doesn't work will with libraries 
>>>>> (if you define your own puts() but not your own exit(), you're in 
>>>>> trouble), but we can fix this if/when it starts to hurt.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> This fails compilation with:
>>>>
>>>> gcc  -m64 -D__x86_64__ -I /tmp/BUILDER/kvm/rpmtop/BUILD/kernel/include 
>>>> -O1 -MMD -MF test/x86/.access.d -g -fomit-frame-pointer -Wa
>>>> ll  -fno-stack-protector   -I ../libkvm -std=gnu99 -ffreestanding -I 
>>>> test/lib -I test/lib/x86   -c -o test/x86/access.o test/x86/a
>>>> ccess.c
>>>> test/x86/access.c:153: error: conflicting types for 'memset'
>>>> /usr/include/string.h:59: error: previous declaration of 'memset' was here
>>>> test/x86/access.c: In function 'ac_test_do_access':
>>>> test/x86/access.c:511: warning: implicit declaration of function 'printf'
>>>> test/x86/access.c: In function 'main':
>>>> test/x86/access.c:578: warning: passing argument 1 of 'smp_init' from 
>>>> incompatible pointer type
>>>> make[1]: *** [test/x86/access.o] Error 1
>>>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/BUILDER/kvm/rpmtop/BUILD/user'
>>>> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.45450 (%build)
>>>>
>>>> So I'm unapplying these patches.
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Ah. Sorry about that. I was testing on x86 and not x86-64. So I didn't
>>> notice that config-x86_64.mak had other test cases outside of what was
>>> in config-x86-common. 
>>>
>>> The problem here is access.c needs to include the new libcflat.h , and
>>> not printf.h . In one of my patches.
>>>
>>> Since I don't currently have an x86-64 setup to try, can't turn out a
>>> patch. I can give you an idea of what is up so here are the changes
>>> needed for test/x86/access.c:
>>>
>>> jerone@thinkpadL:~/work/kvm-userspace/user/test/x86$ vi access.c.FIXED 
>>> jerone@thinkpadL:~/work/kvm-userspace/user/test/x86$ diff -aurp access.c access.c.FIXED 
>>> --- access.c	2008-06-09 08:57:25.000000000 -0500
>>> +++ access.c.FIXED	2008-07-01 02:32:41.000000000 -0500
>>> @@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
>>>  
>>> -#include "smp.h"
>>> -#include "printf.h"
>>> -#include "string.h"
>>> +#include <x86/smp.h>
>>> +#include <libcflat.h>
>>>  
>>>   
>>>       
>> Er, <> includes are for system headers.  Please stick to "" includes.  
>> The previous patches also need to be fixed.
>>     
>
> Actually the include paths to not use system includes. 
>
>   

<> means system include file.  libcflat.h is not a system include file, 
so no pointy brackets.

> Just setup an x86-64 compilation enviroment. Looks like access.c was the
> only test that had the problem. Also the pseudo patch I sent ended up
> being the solution. I will send a formal patch set shortly so you can
> include libcflat.
>   

Thanks.  Please don't send separate create and delete patches, and use 
diff -M, so that we see exactly what's changed rather than a zillion and 
a half adds and removes.


-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.