On Sat, Dec 24 2022, Patrick Wildt <patr...@blueri.se> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 01:14:57AM +0100, Patrick Wildt wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 05:48:41PM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote: >> > On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 23:44:08 +0100, Patrick Wildt wrote: >> > >> > > clang complains when the function is declared with a fixed array size in >> > > a parameter while the prototype is unbounded, like this: >> > > >> > > /usr/src/sys/net/pf.c:4353:54: error: argument 'sns' of type 'struct >> > > pf_src_n >> > > ode *[4]' with mismatched bound [-Werror,-Warray-parameter] >> > > struct pf_rule_actions *act, struct pf_src_node *sns[PF_SN_MAX]) >> > > ^ >> > > /usr/src/sys/net/pf.c:203:28: note: previously declared as 'struct >> > > pf_src_nod >> > > e *[]' here >> > > struct pf_src_node *[]); >> > > ^ >> > > 1 error generated. >> > > >> > > We have a few of that, and was wondering what the better solution is. >> > > clang apparently accepts using * instead of []. The alternative would >> > > be to hardcode the size in the prototype as well. Here's a diff for >> > > a three files for the first version, as example. >> > >> > Using * instead of [] is the saner approach. Hard-coding the sizes >> > into the prototype seems like a bad idea, even if clang is now smart >> > enough to complain about a mismatch. >> > >> > - todd >> >> So, here's the full diff that allows me to compile arm64 GENERIC.MP, >> with radeondrm and amdgpu disabled. > > Right, sorry for derailing the thread with a different discussion. > Here's a diff only for the array/ptr changes. > > ok?
A bit late to this party but ok jca@, thanks. Why do you mention building arm64 GENERIC.MP "with radeondrm and amdgpu disabled"? Don't those drivers build with llvm15? -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
