sim/erc32: Rename EVENT_MAX -> MAX_EVENTS
Checks
Context |
Check |
Description |
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_build--master-aarch64 |
success
|
Testing passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_build--master-arm |
success
|
Testing passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm |
success
|
Testing passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_check--master-aarch64 |
success
|
Testing passed
|
Commit Message
From: Orgad Shaneh <orgads@gmail.com>
EVENT_MAX is defined as 0x7FFFFFFF (INT_MAX) in winuser.h, so when
building on Windows, the value is overridden and compilation fails
because the array size of evbuf is too large.
Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28476
---
sim/erc32/func.c | 6 +++---
sim/erc32/sis.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Comments
>>>>> "Orgad" == Orgad Shaneh <orgads@gmail.com> writes:
Orgad> From: Orgad Shaneh <orgads@gmail.com>
Orgad> EVENT_MAX is defined as 0x7FFFFFFF (INT_MAX) in winuser.h, so when
Orgad> building on Windows, the value is overridden and compilation fails
Orgad> because the array size of evbuf is too large.
Orgad> Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28476
Thanks. I think this is ok.
Approved-By: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Tom
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 7:23 PM Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Orgad" == Orgad Shaneh <orgads@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Orgad> From: Orgad Shaneh <orgads@gmail.com>
> Orgad> EVENT_MAX is defined as 0x7FFFFFFF (INT_MAX) in winuser.h, so when
> Orgad> building on Windows, the value is overridden and compilation fails
> Orgad> because the array size of evbuf is too large.
>
> Orgad> Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28476
>
> Thanks. I think this is ok.
> Approved-By: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Thank you. What's the next step for getting this merged?
- Orgad
>>>>> "Orgad" == Orgad Shaneh <orgads@gmail.com> writes:
>> Thanks. I think this is ok.
>> Approved-By: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Orgad> Thank you. What's the next step for getting this merged?
I've pushed it.
Do you have a copyright assignment in place? I think this patch is
small/obvious enough without one, but we'll need one at some point.
With an assignment you can also get write-after-approval access.
thanks,
Tom
@@ -697,7 +697,7 @@ init_signals(void)
extern struct disassemble_info dinfo;
struct estate ebase;
-struct evcell evbuf[EVENT_MAX];
+struct evcell evbuf[MAX_EVENTS];
struct irqcell irqarr[16];
static int
@@ -864,10 +864,10 @@ init_event(void)
ebase.eq.nxt = NULL;
ebase.freeq = evbuf;
- for (i = 0; i < EVENT_MAX; i++) {
+ for (i = 0; i < MAX_EVENTS; i++) {
evbuf[i].nxt = &evbuf[i + 1];
}
- evbuf[EVENT_MAX - 1].nxt = NULL;
+ evbuf[MAX_EVENTS - 1].nxt = NULL;
}
void
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
#define I_ACC_EXC 1
/* Maximum events in event queue */
-#define EVENT_MAX 256
+#define MAX_EVENTS 256
/* Maximum # of floating point queue */
#define FPUQN 1