On 14 January 2017 at 06:25, Jonathan Gray <j...@jsg.id.au> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 04:51:31PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >> From: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com> >> >> At the moment we support 5+ different implementations each with varying >> amount of bugs - from thread safely problems [1], to outright broken >> implementation(s) [2] >> >> In order to accommodate these we have 150+ lines of configure script and >> extra two configure toggles. Whist an actual implementation being >> ~200loc and our current compat wrapping ~250. >> >> Let's not forget that different people use different code paths, thus >> effectively makes it harder to test and debug since the default >> implementation is automatically detected. >> >> To minimise all these lovely experiences, import the "100% Public >> Domain" OpenBSD sha1 implementation. Clearly document any changes needed >> to get building correctly, since many/most of those can be upstreamed >> making future syncs easier. > > I had feared that this would somehow collide with the symbols > in libc but it seems to build and run xorg/glxgears at least > on broadwell with i965. > Amazing, thanks for testing !
> Patches for OpenBSD go to tech@ and you should look at how portable > openssh and libressl handle systems that lack functions like > explicit_bzero, autoconf detects systems that lack functions or are > known to have broken implementations and alternate versions are > provided. Damien Miller described how this is handled for ssh in > https://www.openbsd.org/papers/portability.pdf > https://www.openbsd.org/papers/auug2005-portability/ > > The attribute could also be checked in autoconf as is already done > for various other attributes. > > Other parts seem odd, posix defines size_t as being in sys/types.h > not stddef.h for example. > > u_int* are bsd types which predate c99 types, I could see an > argument being made for changing the types there but it > would likely have to cover all the other hashes as well, > not just sha1. > Thanks for the tips Jonathan. I'll follow suite as/if we get this patch merged. To answer your question - I've opted for the C99 variants (headers/types) since we build mesa/gallium on non-POSIX platforms. With the former being almost universally supported these days. Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
