bug-hurd
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Upstreaming the glibc Hurd port


From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: Upstreaming the glibc Hurd port
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:03:22 +0200
User-agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)

Zack Weinberg, le mer. 18 avril 2018 09:54:53 -0400, a ecrit:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 7:13 AM, Joseph Myers <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >
> >> Joseph Myers, le mar. 17 avril 2018 23:02:45 +0000, a ecrit:
> >> > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > The patch below would just introduce bits/types/struct___sched_param.h.
> >> > > and bits/types/struct_sched_param.h for all ports since it's the same.
> >> >
> >> > A bits/types/struct_sched_param.h that does "#define sched_param
> >> > __sched_param" is not appropriate for Linux, because it would change the
> >> > C++ mangling of struct sched_param.
> >>
> >> Oh.
> >>
> >> So that could be as per below?
> >
> > That seems plausible (this is not a review of this patch).
> 
> I have a concern: the types 'struct sched_param' and 'struct
> __sched_param' are not compatible, even if their members are identical
> (6.2.7p1 explicitly requires the tags to be the same for
> compatibility).

Ah, probably that's why bits/sched.h used to define both sched_param and
__sched_param with the __sched_priority field, and #define
sched_priority to __sched_priority.  I can do that, it's fine.

Samuel



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]