[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

STINNER Victor added the comment: > Or can we simply keep the function and skip the test? Usually, we prefer to not provide the function in Python if it is known to be broken. Other examples: - HAVE_BROKEN_POLL: don't declare select.poll() - HAVE_BROKEN_PTHREAD_SIGMASK: don't declare signal.pt

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 8e5e19b3cd4e by Victor Stinner in branch '3.4': Issue #22396: On 32-bit AIX platform, don't expose os.posix_fadvise() nor https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/8e5e19b3cd4e New changeset 5ade1061fa3d by Victor Stinner in branch 'default': (Merge 3.4) Is

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

David Edelsohn added the comment: The declaration of the two system calls should be fixed in the AIX header, but the clueless response to the AIX problem report is underwhelming. I don't understand the "keep the function and skip the test" suggestion. I thought that was my first patch -- catc

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Or can we simply keep the function and skip the test? -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: I think that some time AIX bug will be fixed. May be it would be better to introduce special macros, and set it in the configure script (similar to HAVE_GLIBC_MEMMOVE_BUG or HAVE_IPA_PURE_CONST_BUG). Or may be just udefine HAVE_POSIX_FADVISE at such circumst

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

STINNER Victor added the comment: > Attached is a revised patch that disables posix_fadvise() and > posix_fallocate() when building on 32 bit AIX with _LARGE_FILES defined. Good. You should add a reference to this issue, something like "Issue #22396: ...". To avoid code duplication, you may w

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

David Edelsohn added the comment: Attached is a revised patch that disables posix_fadvise() and posix_fallocate() when building on 32 bit AIX with _LARGE_FILES defined. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file36699/22396_aix.patch ___ Python tracke

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

STINNER Victor added the comment: > I understand that AIX doesn't declare the function prototype correctly? AIX bug report: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IV56170 I like Ruby's patch: -#ifdef HAVE_POSIX_FADVISE +/* AIX currently does not support a 32-bit call to posix_fa

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

STINNER Victor added the comment: 10812_aix.patch just hides the problem. I understand that AIX doesn't declare the function prototype correctly? I would prefer to disable the function in the posix module (don't declare it) if it's the case. -- nosy: +haypo __

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

David Edelsohn added the comment: Any feedback about which approach would be acceptable? -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-lis

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: See similar Ruby issue: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9914 . As workaround we can redeclare posix_fadvise as "int posix_fadvise(int fd, long offset, long len, int advice)" on 32-bit AIX with enabled _LARGE_FILES. More safe option is to disable posix_fadv

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > The Python call to those functions does not place the arguments in the > correct registers Well... isn't there a way to fix this? I don't understand how this issue can come up. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue22396] AIX posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate

New submission from David Edelsohn: As with Solaris and Issue10812, test_posix fadvise and fallocate fail on AIX. Python is compiled with _LARGE_FILES, which changes the function signature for posix_fadvise and posix_fallocate so that off_t is "long long" on 32 bit system passed in two regist