On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 19 April 2011 21:36, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> Sorry, I just picked a define without much thought. A more specific
>> one would be flags parameter of epoll_create1(), like EPOLL_CLOEXEC or
>> EPOLL_NONBLOCK. We don't use them now since the tar
On 19 April 2011 21:36, Blue Swirl wrote:
> Sorry, I just picked a define without much thought. A more specific
> one would be flags parameter of epoll_create1(), like EPOLL_CLOEXEC or
> EPOLL_NONBLOCK. We don't use them now since the target system call
> argument is passed untranslated to host, b
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Peter Maydell
wrote:
> On 19 April 2011 20:59, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Peter Maydell
>> wrote:
>>> On 19 April 2011 20:37, Blue Swirl wrote:
But then epoll would not be used.
>>>
>>> I think that's fine -- on a system which i
On 19 April 2011 20:59, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
>> On 19 April 2011 20:37, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>> But then epoll would not be used.
>>
>> I think that's fine -- on a system which isn't advertising epoll
>> in its include files we shouldn't be t
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Peter Maydell
wrote:
> On 19 April 2011 20:37, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Peter Maydell
>> wrote:
>>> Work around a SPARC glibc bug which caused the epoll_create1 configure
>>> test to wrongly claim that the function was present. Some
On 19 April 2011 20:37, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
>> Work around a SPARC glibc bug which caused the epoll_create1 configure
>> test to wrongly claim that the function was present. Some versions of
>> SPARC glibc provided the function in the libra
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Peter Maydell
wrote:
> Work around a SPARC glibc bug which caused the epoll_create1 configure
> test to wrongly claim that the function was present. Some versions of
> SPARC glibc provided the function in the library but didn't declare
> it in the include file; th
Work around a SPARC glibc bug which caused the epoll_create1 configure
test to wrongly claim that the function was present. Some versions of
SPARC glibc provided the function in the library but didn't declare
it in the include file; the result is that gcc warns about an implicit
declaration but a l
