[LTP] [PATCH] trace_shed: Adapt to glibc 2.24 removal of union wait type

[Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Khem Raj" <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat.com>
> Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Sent: Friday, 22 July, 2016 3:54:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] trace_shed: Adapt to glibc 2.24 removal of union wait type
> 
> Hi Jan
> 
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Khem Raj" <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> >> To: ltp@lists.linux.it
> >> Sent: Thursday, 21 July, 2016 6:58:12 AM
> >> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] trace_shed: Adapt to glibc 2.24 removal of union
> >> wait  type
> >>
> >> This is now needed since glibc commit
> >> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=b49ab5f4503f36dcbf43f821f817da66b2931fe6;hp=5f5682b9654101ccaf375c2814cbddbe6033a725
> >>
> >> WEXITSTATUS macro does not do the enum translation anymore and expects
> >> the applications to pass int type fro status
> >>
> >> fixes below error
> >>
> >> trace_sched.c:425:16: error: invalid operands to binary & (have
> >> 'thread_sched_t * {aka struct <anonymous> *}' and 'int')
> >>       thrd_ndx, WEXITSTATUS(status));
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>  testcases/kernel/sched/tool/trace_sched.c | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/sched/tool/trace_sched.c
> >> b/testcases/kernel/sched/tool/trace_sched.c
> >> index 7815686..30dca5f 100644
> >> --- a/testcases/kernel/sched/tool/trace_sched.c
> >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/sched/tool/trace_sched.c
> >> @@ -422,7 +422,7 @@ int main(int argc,                /* number of input
> >> parameters.
> >> */
> >>                       if (status == (thread_sched_t *) - 1) {
> >>                               fprintf(stderr,
> >>                                       "thread [%d] - process exited with
> >>                                       errors %d\n",
> >> -                                     thrd_ndx, WEXITSTATUS(status));
> >> +                                     thrd_ndx, WEXITSTATUS((int)status));
> >
> >
> > Can we just drop WEXITSTATUS() from this fprintf? It's a pointer
> > to some struct, and on top of that it's always -1 here. It doesn't
> > look like this ever provided anything useful.
> 
> Yes, I have sent a series of patches which includes such a fix for
> this. This one
> should be ignored.

I see, sorry I haven't caught up with all mail yet.

Regards,
Jan

> 
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jan
> >
> >>                               exit(-1);
> >>                       } else {
> >>                               exp_prio[thrd_ndx] = status->exp_prio;
> >> --
> >> 2.9.0
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
> >>
>