On 2019-01-16 14:29, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 1/16/19 12:47 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 2019-01-16 12:43, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>> On 1/11/19 9:17 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>> When compiling the ppc code with clang and -std=gnu99, there are a
>>>> couple of warnings/errors like this one:
>>>>
>>>> CC ppc64-softmmu/hw/intc/xics.o
>>>> In file included from hw/intc/xics.c:35:
>>>> include/hw/ppc/xics.h:43:25: error: redefinition of typedef 'ICPState' is
>>>> a C11 feature
>>>> [-Werror,-Wtypedef-redefinition]
>>>> typedef struct ICPState ICPState;
>>>> ^
>>>> target/ppc/cpu.h:1181:25: note: previous definition is here
>>>> typedef struct ICPState ICPState;
>>>> ^
>>>> Work around the problems by including the proper headers instead.
>>>
>>> Thomas,
>>>
>>>
>>> After a closer look, I think we should use 'void *' under PowerPCCPU
>>> as it was the case before I introduced the second interrupt presenter.
>>
>> If you don't like the #includes, why not simply do anonymous struct
>> forward declarations here? I think that would be better than "void *".
>
> yes.
>
>>> That's a bigger change reverting bits of already merged patches. I can
>>> take care of it if you prefer.
>>
>> Could I keep the current patch in my series so that I can get the
>> patches finally merged? You could then do any clean up that you like on
>> top of it, ok?
>
> OK.
>
> See below the patch I would propose. Compiled tested with clang -std=gnu99.
[...]
> @@ -1204,8 +1199,8 @@ struct PowerPCCPU {
> int32_t node_id; /* NUMA node this CPU belongs to */
> PPCHash64Options *hash64_opts;
> #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> - ICPState *icp;
> - XiveTCTX *tctx;
> + struct ICPState *icp;
> + struct XiveTCTX *tctx;
> #endif
That's pretty much what I had in an earlier version of my patch:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-01/msg01810.html
But Greg did not like it:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-01/msg01893.html
Thomas
