Add missing <strings.h> includes
PATCH 1/1 Add missing <strings.h> includes
A couple of files use ffs() without explicitly including strings.h. Some systems will pull in ffs()'s declaration through another header anyway, but not when compiling against bionic in AOSP master.
--- nouveau/nouveau.c | 1 + tests/modetest/modetest.c | 1 + 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
nouveau/nouveau.c +1 -0
@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@#include <stdlib.h> #include <stdint.h> #include <string.h> +#include <strings.h> #include <stdbool.h> #include <assert.h> #include <errno.h>
tests/modetest/modetest.c +1 -0
@@ -50,6 +50,7 @@#include <inttypes.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <string.h> +#include <strings.h> #include <errno.h> #include <sys/poll.h> #include <sys/time.h>
Signature · 6 lines
2.2.0.rc0.207.ga3a616c _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Hi Greg,
Quoted 5 lines · Greg Hackmann
A couple of files use
ffs()without explicitly includingstrings.h. Some systems will pull in ffs()'s declaration through another header anyway, but not when compiling against bionic in AOSP master.Signed-off-by Greg Hackmann <[email protected]>
Thanks for the patch.
I'm not sure why I haven't hit this while building with Android-x86's bionic, although it's the right thing to do.
I will give it a few days more for anyone to comment and I'll push it.
From a quick look I cannot see libdrm in the AOSP build. Are you experimenting with a libdrm based hwcompositor again :-)
Cheers
Emil
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Quoted 3 lines · Emil Velikov
I'm not sure why I haven't hit this while building with Android-x86's bionic, although it's the right thing to do.
Maybe a difference in bionic versions? I know the bionic team made some recent (post-5.1) changes that unintentionally exposed a handful of other missing #includes in our tree.
Quoted 2 lines
From a quick look I cannot see libdrm in the AOSP build. Are you experimenting with a libdrm based hwcompositor again :-)
Yeah. That's where I want to end up in the long term, anyway. I've said publicly that we'd eventually like to converge with upstream on this, and I still mean it. :)
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Quoted 9 lines · Greg Hackmann
Quoted 3 lines · Emil Velikov
I'm not sure why I haven't hit this while building with Android-x86's bionic, although it's the right thing to do.
Maybe a difference in bionic versions? I know the bionic team made some recent (post-5.1) changes that unintentionally exposed a handful of other missing #includes in our tree.
Could be. I've never really bothered checking the bionic (both downstream patches and version) that Android-x86 uses.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
From a quick look I cannot see libdrm in the AOSP build. Are you experimenting with a libdrm based hwcompositor again :-)
Yeah. That's where I want to end up in the long term, anyway. I've said publicly that we'd eventually like to converge with upstream on this, and I still mean it. :)
Great glad to hear. We have a GSoC student that is working on it this summer, so things might be closer than expected.
May I suggest that you ping/send patches to the list early and often. There is a lot of traffic, and most people are busy with their own hardware so patches do get missed/forgotten.
Another good idea is to pop over at #dri-devel at FreeNode, and have a chat with the guys in real time - someone might be able to find a solution/steer you in the right direction :-)
Cheers,
Emil
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
2015-04-24 0:56 GMT+08:00 Emil Velikov <[email protected]>:
Quoted 6 lines · Greg Hackmann
Quoted 5 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 3 lines
I'm not sure why I haven't hit this while building with Android-x86's bionic, although it's the right thing to do.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Maybe a difference in bionic versions? I know the bionic team made some recent (post-5.1) changes that unintentionally exposed a handful of other missing #includes in our tree.
Could be. I've never really bothered checking the bionic (both downstream patches and version) that Android-x86 uses.
Each Android-x86 branch is based on the respective AOSP stable release.
That means bionic of kitkat-x86 is based on ASOSP kitkat-mr2.2, while lollipop-x86 is based on the lollipop-mr1 release.
It may be different than the AOSP master branch.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list [email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel