aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorKhem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>2017-11-14 19:02:09 -0800
committerKhem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>2017-11-14 19:41:11 -0800
commit2b3c77a207a3c5d222117523d242388308fc4850 (patch)
tree3b41feaf7c7d70f34108819dfd15bbd43609bf78
parente2e27ec2e40a038e525574bcdef06630c7bacf64 (diff)
downloadopenembedded-core-contrib-kraj/toolchain-updates.tar.gz
openembedded-core-contrib-kraj/toolchain-updates.tar.bz2
openembedded-core-contrib-kraj/toolchain-updates.zip
glibc: Upgrade to latest on 2.26 releasekraj/toolchain-updates
For detailed view of changes see https://github.com/kraj/glibc/compare/glibc-2.26...77f921dac17c5fa99bd9e926d926c327982895f7 drop upstreamed 1 patch Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
-rw-r--r--meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0026-assert-Suppress-pedantic-warning-caused-by-statement.patch90
-rw-r--r--meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.26.bb3
2 files changed, 1 insertions, 92 deletions
diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0026-assert-Suppress-pedantic-warning-caused-by-statement.patch b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0026-assert-Suppress-pedantic-warning-caused-by-statement.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index b2bb96b818..0000000000
--- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0026-assert-Suppress-pedantic-warning-caused-by-statement.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,90 +0,0 @@
-From 037283cbc74739b72f36dfec827d120faa243406 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
-Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 11:50:55 +0200
-Subject: [PATCH 26/26] assert: Suppress pedantic warning caused by statement
- expression [BZ# 21242]
-
-On 07/05/2017 10:15 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
-> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
->> On 07/05/2017 05:46 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
->>> A problem occurs to me: expressions involving VLAs _are_ evaluated
->>> inside sizeof.
->>
->> The type of the sizeof argument would still be int (due to the
->> comparison against 0), so this doesn't actually occur.
->
-> I rechecked what C99 says about sizeof and VLAs, and you're right -
-> the operand of sizeof is only evaluated when sizeof is _directly_
-> applied to a VLA. So this is indeed safe, but I think this wrinkle
-> should be mentioned in the comment. Perhaps
->
-> /* The first occurrence of EXPR is not evaluated due to the sizeof,
-> but will trigger any pedantic warnings masked by the __extension__
-> for the second occurrence. The explicit comparison against zero
-> ensures that sizeof is not directly applied to a function pointer or
-> bit-field (which would be ill-formed) or VLA (which would be evaluated). */
->
-> zw
-
-What about the attached patch?
-
-Siddhesh, is this okay during the freeze? I'd like to backport it to
-2.25 as well.
-
-Thanks,
-Florian
-
-assert: Suppress pedantic warning caused by statement expression
-
-2017-07-06 Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
-
- [BZ #21242]
- * assert/assert.h [__GNUC__ && !__STRICT_ANSI__] (assert):
- Suppress pedantic warning resulting from statement expression.
- (__ASSERT_FUNCTION): Add missing __extendsion__.
----
-
-Upstream-Status: Submitted
-Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
-
- assert/assert.h | 12 +++++++++---
- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
-
-diff --git a/assert/assert.h b/assert/assert.h
-index 22f019537c..6801cfeb10 100644
---- a/assert/assert.h
-+++ b/assert/assert.h
-@@ -91,13 +91,19 @@ __END_DECLS
- ? __ASSERT_VOID_CAST (0) \
- : __assert_fail (#expr, __FILE__, __LINE__, __ASSERT_FUNCTION))
- # else
-+/* The first occurrence of EXPR is not evaluated due to the sizeof,
-+ but will trigger any pedantic warnings masked by the __extension__
-+ for the second occurrence. The explicit comparison against zero is
-+ required to support function pointers and bit fields in this
-+ context, and to suppress the evaluation of variable length
-+ arrays. */
- # define assert(expr) \
-- ({ \
-+ ((void) sizeof ((expr) == 0), __extension__ ({ \
- if (expr) \
- ; /* empty */ \
- else \
- __assert_fail (#expr, __FILE__, __LINE__, __ASSERT_FUNCTION); \
-- })
-+ }))
- # endif
-
- # ifdef __USE_GNU
-@@ -113,7 +119,7 @@ __END_DECLS
- C9x has a similar variable called __func__, but prefer the GCC one since
- it demangles C++ function names. */
- # if defined __cplusplus ? __GNUC_PREREQ (2, 6) : __GNUC_PREREQ (2, 4)
--# define __ASSERT_FUNCTION __PRETTY_FUNCTION__
-+# define __ASSERT_FUNCTION __extension__ __PRETTY_FUNCTION__
- # else
- # if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L
- # define __ASSERT_FUNCTION __func__
---
-2.13.3
-
diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.26.bb b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.26.bb
index 135ec4fb16..5213a6a942 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.26.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc_2.26.bb
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSES;md5=e9a558e243b36d3209f380deb394b213 \
DEPENDS += "gperf-native"
-SRCREV ?= "1c9a5c270d8b66f30dcfaf1cb2d6cf39d3e18369"
+SRCREV ?= "77f921dac17c5fa99bd9e926d926c327982895f7"
SRCBRANCH ?= "release/${PV}/master"
@@ -40,7 +40,6 @@ SRC_URI = "${GLIBC_GIT_URI};branch=${SRCBRANCH};name=glibc \
file://0023-Define-DUMMY_LOCALE_T-if-not-defined.patch \
file://0024-elf-dl-deps.c-Make-_dl_build_local_scope-breadth-fir.patch \
file://0025-locale-fix-hard-coded-reference-to-gcc-E.patch \
- file://0026-assert-Suppress-pedantic-warning-caused-by-statement.patch \
file://0027-glibc-reset-dl-load-write-lock-after-forking.patch \
file://0028-Bug-4578-add-ld.so-lock-while-fork.patch \
"