| Message ID | 1449873171-7158-1-git-send-email-aurelien@aurel32.net |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 23:32 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Since GLIBC requires a minimum 2.6.32 kernel, the patch cleanups > the ARM ioperm by removing pre-2.4.23 kernel support. Looks good. Please check that in. p.
On Friday 11 December 2015 23:32:51 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Since GLIBC requires a minimum 2.6.32 kernel, the patch cleanups > the ARM ioperm by removing pre-2.4.23 kernel support. > --- > ChangeLog | 9 +++++++++ > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ioperm.c | 11 ++--------- > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) The patch looks fine, but I found something else about the code here: I notice that the contents of that file only deal with a single ARMv4 platform, and very few of those machines are still in use with new software. Would it make sense to build this code only when targeting an ARMv4 system, as opposed to ARMv5 or ARMv7? Arnd
On 2015-12-12 00:06, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 11 December 2015 23:32:51 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > Since GLIBC requires a minimum 2.6.32 kernel, the patch cleanups > > the ARM ioperm by removing pre-2.4.23 kernel support. > > --- > > ChangeLog | 9 +++++++++ > > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ioperm.c | 11 ++--------- > > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > The patch looks fine, but I found something else about the code here: > > I notice that the contents of that file only deal with a single ARMv4 > platform, and very few of those machines are still in use with > new software. > > Would it make sense to build this code only when targeting an ARMv4 > system, as opposed to ARMv5 or ARMv7? The functions provided by this file (ioperm, iopl, in{b,w,l} and out{b,w,l}) are part of the ABI and can't be removed. If we don't compile this file, we should at least provide stubs functions which always fail. Note also that the libc configure script currently does not try to detect anything below ARMv6 and considers everything below it as "default".
On 2015-12-11 22:37, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 23:32 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > Since GLIBC requires a minimum 2.6.32 kernel, the patch cleanups > > the ARM ioperm by removing pre-2.4.23 kernel support. > > Looks good. Please check that in. Thanks for the review, I have just pushed the change.
diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog index 4bda934..13be8a8 100644 --- a/ChangeLog +++ b/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,12 @@ +2015-12-11 Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> + + * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ioperm.c: Do not include + <linux/version.h>. + [LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,4,23)]: Remove + conditional code. + (init_iosys): Use CTL_BUS_ISA instead of BUS_ISA in iobase_name + and ioshift_name initialization. + 2015-12-11 Steve Ellcey <sellcey@imgtec.com> * sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32/k_rem_pio2f.c (__kernel_rem_pio2f): diff --git a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ioperm.c b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ioperm.c index 2291def..053d53b 100644 --- a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ioperm.c +++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ioperm.c @@ -43,7 +43,6 @@ #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/mman.h> -#include <linux/version.h> #include <sys/sysctl.h> #define PATH_ARM_SYSTYPE "/etc/arm_systype" @@ -94,19 +93,13 @@ static struct platform { * values. */ -/* The Linux kernel headers renamed this constant between 2.5.26 and - 2.5.27. It was backported to 2.4 between 2.4.22 and 2.4.23. */ -#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,4,23) -# define BUS_ISA CTL_BUS_ISA -#endif - static int init_iosys (void) { char systype[256]; int i, n; - static int iobase_name[] = { CTL_BUS, BUS_ISA, BUS_ISA_PORT_BASE }; - static int ioshift_name[] = { CTL_BUS, BUS_ISA, BUS_ISA_PORT_SHIFT }; + static int iobase_name[] = { CTL_BUS, CTL_BUS_ISA, BUS_ISA_PORT_BASE }; + static int ioshift_name[] = { CTL_BUS, CTL_BUS_ISA, BUS_ISA_PORT_SHIFT }; size_t len = sizeof(io.base); if (! __sysctl (iobase_name, 3, &io.io_base, &len, NULL, 0)