Fix ioctl types for non-x86 musl #301
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
@bors: r+ Thanks! |
|
📌 Commit aa4a2c6 has been approved by |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2016
Fix ioctl types for non-x86 musl This fixes up #289 by changing the type for other platforms as well.
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, travis |
Susurrus
pushed a commit
to Susurrus/libc
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 26, 2017
Add support for MIPS targets Closes rust-lang#300
danielverkamp
pushed a commit
to danielverkamp/libc
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 28, 2020
This was historically done as the contents of the `i686` module wouldn't actually compile on i586 for various reasons. I believe I've tracked this down to rust-lang#300 where LLVM refuses to compile a function using the `x86_mmx` type without actually enabling the `mmx` feature (sort of reasonably so!). This commit will now compile in both the `i586` and `i686` modules of this crate into the `i586-unknown-linux-gnu` target, and the relevant functions now also enable the `mmx` feature if they're using the `__m64` type. I believe this is uncovering a more widespread problem where the `__m64` isn't usable outside the context of `mmx`-enabled functions. The i686 and x86_64 targets have this feature enabled by default which is why it's worked there, but they're not enabled for the i586 target. We'll probably want to consider this when stabilizing!
workingjubilee
added a commit
to workingjubilee/libc
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2021
This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR rust-lang#289, PR rust-lang#301, or PR rust-lang#1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints.
workingjubilee
added a commit
to workingjubilee/libc
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2021
This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR rust-lang#289, PR rust-lang#301, or PR rust-lang#1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2021
Fix mips64-musl ioctl consts to c_int This arch was overlooked or unspecified in earlier PRs that fixed c_ulong to c_int for ioctl.h consts for musl, see PR #289, PR #301, or PR #1097 for such prior art, however these are still args to fn ioctl on mips64-musl, which is expecting c_ints. Some numbers acquired casts to reflect the fact the data is being used and (so should be written as) an unsized bitfield, even if the value is greater than i32::MAX. Currently rustc is not building on mips64-linux-musl because of this error.
1 task
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixes up #289 by changing the type for other platforms as well.