diff mbox

conformtest failures on i386

Message ID 20140624114248.GN4477@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com
State Committed
Headers

Commit Message

Siddhesh Poyarekar June 24, 2014, 11:42 a.m. UTC 
  On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:02:26AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:37:58AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > The conformtest run on i386 builds have 40 FAILs in addition to the
> > > > 120 XFAILS.  Are these known are do those need to be fixed?
> > > 
> > > You don't say what any of the actual errors shown in the logs for the 
> > > individual tests are.  The presumption is that any such failure should be 
> > > fixed, as indicating an architecture-specific header bug (unless it 
> > > indicates a problem with the testcase, or that the internal include/ 
> > > headers are missing an _ISOMAC conditional).
> > 
> > I hadn't looked at the actual causes of failures because the failures
> > themselves were not relevant to the code I was testing.  I'll look
> > through the failures and file bugs wherever applicable.
> 
> The few I just looked at were:
> 
>     Namespace violation: "d"
> 
> which may be coming from bits/pthreadtypes.h.

Yeah, all of the failures are the same as above.  How about this for a
fix:

Siddhesh

	* sysdeps/x86/nptl/bits/pthreadtypes.h (pthread_mutex_t):
	Rename member __data.d to __data.__elision_data.

Comments

Joseph Myers June 24, 2014, 2:03 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:

> Yeah, all of the failures are the same as above.  How about this for a
> fix:

Seems OK (as far as I can tell, nothing references the name of this 
field), as long as you'd done the usual testing, and as long as a bug is 
filed, referenced in the ChangeLog entry and NEWS and closed if the issue 
was present in a release.
Siddhesh Poyarekar June 24, 2014, 5:23 p.m. UTC | #2 
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 02:03:19PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> 
> > Yeah, all of the failures are the same as above.  How about this for a
> > fix:
> 
> Seems OK (as far as I can tell, nothing references the name of this 
> field), as long as you'd done the usual testing, and as long as a bug is 
> filed, referenced in the ChangeLog entry and NEWS and closed if the issue 
> was present in a release.

Tested x86_64 and x86 to verify that both have no FAILs, filed and
closed 17084 with a mention in the NEWS.

Siddhesh
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/sysdeps/x86/nptl/bits/pthreadtypes.h b/sysdeps/x86/nptl/bits/pthreadtypes.h
index 7f8076b..aad2e14 100644
--- a/sysdeps/x86/nptl/bits/pthreadtypes.h
+++ b/sysdeps/x86/nptl/bits/pthreadtypes.h
@@ -115,10 +115,10 @@  typedef union
       {
 	short __espins;
 	short __elision;
-# define __spins d.__espins
-# define __elision d.__elision
+# define __spins __elision_data.__espins
+# define __elision __elision_data.__elision
 # define __PTHREAD_SPINS         { 0, 0 }
-      } d;
+      } __elision_data;
       __pthread_slist_t __list;
     };
 #endif