diff mbox

[2/2] package/oprofile: fux musl build

Message ID 1454235289-1353-2-git-send-email-bernd.kuhls@t-online.de
State Superseded
Headers show

Commit Message

Bernd Kuhls Jan. 31, 2016, 10:14 a.m. UTC
The build error has not yet been found by the autobuilders:

operf.cpp: In function ‘int __delete_old_previous_sample_data(const char*, const stat*, int, FTW*)’:
operf.cpp:862:10: error: ‘FTW_STOP’ was not declared in this scope
   return FTW_STOP;
          ^
operf.cpp:864:10: error: ‘FTW_CONTINUE’ was not declared in this scope
   return FTW_CONTINUE;
          ^
operf.cpp: In function ‘void convert_sample_data()’:
operf.cpp:899:41: error: ‘FTW_ACTIONRETVAL’ was not declared in this scope
                 int flags = FTW_DEPTH | FTW_ACTIONRETVAL;

Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
---
 package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch

Comments

Arnout Vandecappelle Feb. 2, 2016, 1:02 p.m. UTC | #1
On 31-01-16 11:14, Bernd Kuhls wrote:
> The build error has not yet been found by the autobuilders:
> 
> operf.cpp: In function ‘int __delete_old_previous_sample_data(const char*, const stat*, int, FTW*)’:
> operf.cpp:862:10: error: ‘FTW_STOP’ was not declared in this scope
>    return FTW_STOP;
>           ^
> operf.cpp:864:10: error: ‘FTW_CONTINUE’ was not declared in this scope
>    return FTW_CONTINUE;
>           ^
> operf.cpp: In function ‘void convert_sample_data()’:
> operf.cpp:899:41: error: ‘FTW_ACTIONRETVAL’ was not declared in this scope
>                  int flags = FTW_DEPTH | FTW_ACTIONRETVAL;
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
> ---
>  package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 53 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch
> 
> diff --git a/package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch b/package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..95ae200
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
> +Fix musl build
> +
> +Downloaded from:
> +https://github.com/openwrt-mirror/openwrt/blob/f22d5e25660106a48727c7aa5d1a73e4171a7987/package/devel/oprofile/patches/100-musl.patch
> +after I found a hint for the patch here:
> +http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/112675/
> +
> +Because openwrt removed the oprofile package from their repo last week
> +https://github.com/openwrt-mirror/openwrt/commit/aaf46a8524e138e1673a398e8d2dd9357405b313#diff-fe14456f94abf436d997e2c01c10f3bd
> +I decided to put this patch into the buildroot repo instead of adding
> +_PATCH to oprofile.mk

 Commit message could be a lot better:

Remove non-Posix use of FTW_ACTIONRETVAL

The musl implementation of nftw doesn't support the glibc extension
FTW_ACTIONRETVAL. Since none of the features of FTW_ACTIONRETVAL are
used here, just use the normal nftw return value.


> +
> +Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
> +
> +--- a/pe_profiling/operf.cpp
> ++++ b/pe_profiling/operf.cpp
> +@@ -857,11 +857,14 @@ static int __delete_old_previous_sample_
> +                                 int tflag  __attribute__((unused)),
> +                                 struct FTW *ftwbuf __attribute__((unused)))
> + {
> ++	int err;
> ++
> + 	if (remove(fpath)) {
> ++		err = errno;
> + 		perror("sample data removal error");
> +-		return FTW_STOP;
> ++		return err;
> + 	} else {
> +-		return FTW_CONTINUE;
> ++		return 0;
> + 	}
> + }
> + 
> +@@ -896,7 +899,7 @@ static void convert_sample_data(void)
> + 		return;
> + 
> + 	if (!operf_options::append) {
> +-                int flags = FTW_DEPTH | FTW_ACTIONRETVAL;
> ++                int flags = FTW_DEPTH;
> + 		errno = 0;
> + 		if (nftw(previous_sampledir.c_str(), __delete_old_previous_sample_data, 32, flags) !=0 &&
> + 				errno != ENOENT) {
> +--- a/libop/op_events.c
> ++++ b/libop/op_events.c
> +@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static int parse_hex(char const * str)
> + static u64 parse_long_hex(char const * str)
> + {
> + 	u64 value;
> +-	if (sscanf(str, "%Lx", &value) != 1)
> ++	if (sscanf(str, "0x%llx", &value) != 1)

 Why is this change needed? musl supports the standard %Lx specifier, no?

 Regards,
 Arnout

> + 		parse_error("expected long hexadecimal value");
> + 
> + 	fflush(stderr);
>
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch b/package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..95ae200
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/oprofile/0001-musl.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ 
+Fix musl build
+
+Downloaded from:
+https://github.com/openwrt-mirror/openwrt/blob/f22d5e25660106a48727c7aa5d1a73e4171a7987/package/devel/oprofile/patches/100-musl.patch
+after I found a hint for the patch here:
+http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/112675/
+
+Because openwrt removed the oprofile package from their repo last week
+https://github.com/openwrt-mirror/openwrt/commit/aaf46a8524e138e1673a398e8d2dd9357405b313#diff-fe14456f94abf436d997e2c01c10f3bd
+I decided to put this patch into the buildroot repo instead of adding
+_PATCH to oprofile.mk
+
+Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
+
+--- a/pe_profiling/operf.cpp
++++ b/pe_profiling/operf.cpp
+@@ -857,11 +857,14 @@ static int __delete_old_previous_sample_
+                                 int tflag  __attribute__((unused)),
+                                 struct FTW *ftwbuf __attribute__((unused)))
+ {
++	int err;
++
+ 	if (remove(fpath)) {
++		err = errno;
+ 		perror("sample data removal error");
+-		return FTW_STOP;
++		return err;
+ 	} else {
+-		return FTW_CONTINUE;
++		return 0;
+ 	}
+ }
+ 
+@@ -896,7 +899,7 @@ static void convert_sample_data(void)
+ 		return;
+ 
+ 	if (!operf_options::append) {
+-                int flags = FTW_DEPTH | FTW_ACTIONRETVAL;
++                int flags = FTW_DEPTH;
+ 		errno = 0;
+ 		if (nftw(previous_sampledir.c_str(), __delete_old_previous_sample_data, 32, flags) !=0 &&
+ 				errno != ENOENT) {
+--- a/libop/op_events.c
++++ b/libop/op_events.c
+@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static int parse_hex(char const * str)
+ static u64 parse_long_hex(char const * str)
+ {
+ 	u64 value;
+-	if (sscanf(str, "%Lx", &value) != 1)
++	if (sscanf(str, "0x%llx", &value) != 1)
+ 		parse_error("expected long hexadecimal value");
+ 
+ 	fflush(stderr);