sim: Fix -Wincompatible-pointer-types in frv/sem.c
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-aarch64 |
success
|
Testing passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm |
success
|
Testing passed
|
Commit Message
GCC errors on -Wincompatible-pointer-types
sim/frv/sem.c: In function ‘frvbf_sem_mmachu’:
sim/frv/sem.c:24345:41: error: passing argument 2 of ‘sim_queue_fn_di_write’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
24345 | sim_queue_fn_di_write (current_cpu, frvbf_h_acc40U_set, FLD (f_ACC40Uk), opval);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| |
| void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, UDI) {aka void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long unsigned int)}
In file included from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/cgen-cpu.h:25,
from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/sim-cpu.h:32,
from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/sim-base.h:90,
from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/frv/sim-main.h:41,
from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/frv/sem.c:28:
../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/cgen-par.h:195:47: note: expected ‘void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI)’ {aka ‘void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long int)’} but argument is of type ‘void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, UDI)’ {aka ‘void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long unsigned int)’}
195 | extern void sim_queue_fn_di_write (SIM_CPU *, void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI), UINT, DI);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The issue is that sim_queue_fn_di_write takes a function with a DI argument
but frvbf_h_acc40U_set takes a UDI. Since there is no sim_queue_fn that
takes a UDI just define frvbf_h_acc40U_set as if it takes a DI.
---
sim/frv/cpu.c | 2 +-
sim/frv/cpu.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Comments
On 22 Jan 2024 00:06, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> GCC errors on -Wincompatible-pointer-types
>
> sim/frv/sem.c: In function ‘frvbf_sem_mmachu’:
> sim/frv/sem.c:24345:41: error: passing argument 2 of ‘sim_queue_fn_di_write’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
> 24345 | sim_queue_fn_di_write (current_cpu, frvbf_h_acc40U_set, FLD (f_ACC40Uk), opval);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | |
> | void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, UDI) {aka void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long unsigned int)}
> In file included from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/cgen-cpu.h:25,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/sim-cpu.h:32,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/sim-base.h:90,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/frv/sim-main.h:41,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/frv/sem.c:28:
> ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/cgen-par.h:195:47: note: expected ‘void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI)’ {aka ‘void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long int)’} but argument is of type ‘void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, UDI)’ {aka ‘void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long unsigned int)’}
> 195 | extern void sim_queue_fn_di_write (SIM_CPU *, void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI), UINT, DI);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> The issue is that sim_queue_fn_di_write takes a function with a DI argument
> but frvbf_h_acc40U_set takes a UDI. Since there is no sim_queue_fn that
> takes a UDI just define frvbf_h_acc40U_set as if it takes a DI.
> ---
> sim/frv/cpu.c | 2 +-
> sim/frv/cpu.h | 2 +-
unfortunately this doesn't work as cpu.[ch] is generated.
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2023-December/205492.html
https://sourceware.org/PR29752
-mike
Hi Mike,
On Sun, 2024-01-21 at 22:45 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2024 00:06, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > GCC errors on -Wincompatible-pointer-types
> >
> > sim/frv/sem.c: In function ‘frvbf_sem_mmachu’:
> > sim/frv/sem.c:24345:41: error: passing argument 2 of ‘sim_queue_fn_di_write’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
> > 24345 | sim_queue_fn_di_write (current_cpu, frvbf_h_acc40U_set, FLD (f_ACC40Uk), opval);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | |
> > | void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, UDI) {aka void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long unsigned int)}
> > In file included from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/cgen-cpu.h:25,
> > from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/sim-cpu.h:32,
> > from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/sim-base.h:90,
> > from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/frv/sim-main.h:41,
> > from ../../binutils-gdb/sim/frv/sem.c:28:
> > ../../binutils-gdb/sim/common/cgen-par.h:195:47: note: expected ‘void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI)’ {aka ‘void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long int)’} but argument is of type ‘void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, UDI)’ {aka ‘void (*)(struct _sim_cpu *, unsigned int, long unsigned int)’}
> > 195 | extern void sim_queue_fn_di_write (SIM_CPU *, void (*)(SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI), UINT, DI);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > The issue is that sim_queue_fn_di_write takes a function with a DI argument
> > but frvbf_h_acc40U_set takes a UDI. Since there is no sim_queue_fn that
> > takes a UDI just define frvbf_h_acc40U_set as if it takes a DI.
> > ---
> > sim/frv/cpu.c | 2 +-
> > sim/frv/cpu.h | 2 +-
>
> unfortunately this doesn't work as cpu.[ch] is generated.
>
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2023-December/205492.html
> https://sourceware.org/PR29752
O, that is unfortunate. I admit to not know how to actually regenerate
these files. Also it seems PR29752 does include a solution. What kind
of testing would you like to see to make sure it is correct?
Thanks,
Mark
On 22 Jan 2024 12:30, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Sun, 2024-01-21 at 22:45 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 22 Jan 2024 00:06, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > The issue is that sim_queue_fn_di_write takes a function with a DI argument
> > > but frvbf_h_acc40U_set takes a UDI. Since there is no sim_queue_fn that
> > > takes a UDI just define frvbf_h_acc40U_set as if it takes a DI.
> > > ---
> > > sim/frv/cpu.c | 2 +-
> > > sim/frv/cpu.h | 2 +-
> >
> > unfortunately this doesn't work as cpu.[ch] is generated.
> >
> > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2023-December/205492.html
> > https://sourceware.org/PR29752
>
> O, that is unfortunate. I admit to not know how to actually regenerate
> these files.
`make frv/cgen` would do it for frv
> Also it seems PR29752 does include a solution. What kind
> of testing would you like to see to make sure it is correct?
i don't understand frv internals/whatever well enough to know if my proposal
is reasonable. although if we don't get a response, i guess there isn't much
choice as things fail to build with newer compilers.
-mike
@@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ frvbf_h_acc40U_get (SIM_CPU *current_cpu, UINT regno)
/* Set a value for h-acc40U. */
void
-frvbf_h_acc40U_set (SIM_CPU *current_cpu, UINT regno, UDI newval)
+frvbf_h_acc40U_set (SIM_CPU *current_cpu, UINT regno, DI newval)
{
SET_H_ACC40U (regno, newval);
}
@@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ void frvbf_h_accg_set (SIM_CPU *, UINT, USI);
DI frvbf_h_acc40S_get (SIM_CPU *, UINT);
void frvbf_h_acc40S_set (SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI);
UDI frvbf_h_acc40U_get (SIM_CPU *, UINT);
-void frvbf_h_acc40U_set (SIM_CPU *, UINT, UDI);
+void frvbf_h_acc40U_set (SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI);
DI frvbf_h_iacc0_get (SIM_CPU *, UINT);
void frvbf_h_iacc0_set (SIM_CPU *, UINT, DI);
UQI frvbf_h_iccr_get (SIM_CPU *, UINT);