Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 00:56:56 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: kabaev@gmail.com Cc: kan@FreeBSD.org, arch@FreeBSD.org, obrien@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Need a code review Message-ID: <20080823.005656.1543769327.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20080822213505.1993beda@kan.dnsalias.net> References: <20080729.161303.709402272.imp@bsdimp.com> <20080822213505.1993beda@kan.dnsalias.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <20080822213505.1993beda@kan.dnsalias.net> Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> writes: : On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:13:03 -0600 (MDT) : "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: : : > Greetings, : > : > The FreeBSD/mips efforts are getting close. We're down to 4 patches : > against the main tree, divided up among different programs: cc, : > binutils, libpam and the CDDL stuff for zfs. : > : > http://people.freebsd.org/~gonzo/mips2/binutils.diff : > http://people.freebsd.org/~gonzo/mips2/cc.diff : > http://people.freebsd.org/~gonzo/mips2/cddl.diff : > http://people.freebsd.org/~gonzo/mips2/libpam.diff : > : > If you have an interest in any of these area, or would like to provide : > feedback on the patches, now would be a good time to do so. :-) : > : > We'd like to commit these patches to the tree by the end of next week, : > if at all possible. If you are a maintainer of this software, we'd : > especially like to get feedback from you on these patches. If we : > don't hear back from you, we'll assume that you are fine with them :-) : > : > Warner : : cc.diff part is OK, except that files we copy from vendor intact should : be marked as such. Ideally, by putting their pristine versions : in /vendor and branching into head/src/contrib/gcc. Good idea. Now, if only I can figure out how to do that... : Some comments in new FreeBSD files still claim they are for NetBSD/mips. We can fix that :-) Good catch. : +#ifdef HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP : +#undef HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP : +#endif : #define HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP 1 : : Can this be rewritten as : #ifndef HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP : #define HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP 1 : #endif No. The whole reason those changes were introduced was to quiet warnings that HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP was redefined... We can omit them if they will cause problems. I wasn't real concerned about the warnings, but Randal Stewart fixed them since they bugged him. Maybe there's a better way? Any suggestions? Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080823.005656.1543769327.imp>