Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:52:53 -0700 From: Michael Forney <mforney@...rney.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: riscv port for review On 2018-10-11, Michael Forney <mforney@...rney.org> wrote: > On 2018-09-27, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: >> Pulled from here: >> https://github.com/riscv/riscv-musl/commit/6a4f4a9c774608add4b02f95322518bd2f5f51ee >> >> Attached for review. > > I noticed that some fcntl.h constants are incorrect (O_DIRECTORY, > O_NOFOLLOW, O_DIRECT, O_LARGEFILE, and O_TMPFILE). Linux doesn't seem > to have a riscv-specific fcntl.h, so I think they just come from > asm-generic. While playing around with a riscv32-linux-musl toolchain and tinyemu, I found a few more issues: - riscv linux has no renameat syscall. I think __NR_renameat needs to be removed from arch/riscv*/bits/syscall.h.in, and musl's rename and renameat need to fallback to SYS_renameat2 if SYS_renameat is not defined. - arch/riscv32/bits/syscall.h.in defines syscall names as if it were 64-bit. I think the following changes are necessary __NR_fcntl -> __NR_fcntl64 __NR_statfs -> __NR_statfs64 __NR_fstatfs -> __NR_fstatfs64 __NR_truncate -> __NR_truncate64 __NR_ftruncate -> __NR_ftruncate64 __NR_lseek -> __NR__llseek (and __NR_llseek?) __NR_fstatat -> __NR_fstatat64 __NR_fstat -> __NR_fstat64 __NR_mmap -> __NR_mmap2 __NR_fadvise64 -> __NR_fadvise64_64 - Since riscv32 uses fcntl64, and musl's struct flock corresponds to struct flock64 on 32-bit, F_GETLK, F_SETLK, and F_SETLKW should be defined to the corresponding *64 values (12, 13, 14). This matches arch/generic/bits/fcntl.h, so I think arch/riscv32/bits/fcntl.h should just be completely removed as Rich suggested. arch/riscv64/bits/fcntl.h needs to stay to define the non *64 values (5, 6, 7). - For detecting soft float, configure compares $ARCH to riscv and riscv64, but ARCH is set to riscv32 or riscv64 above. Also ARCH is set to riscv32 when $target is riscv* but not riscv64*. Should this be riscv32*? - There are several instances of preprocessor checks __riscv_soft_float, but this does not seem to be defined by gcc. Perhaps this is superseded by __riscv_flen or __riscv_float_abi_soft? - The functions in src/math/riscv* don't fall back to the C implementation for soft float.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.