Hi, Jeff Is the revised patch from Clement okay?
Thanks, David On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 3:59 AM CHIGOT, CLEMENT <clement.chi...@atos.net> wrote: > > >>> So my worry here is this is really a host property -- ie, this is > >>> behavior of where GCC runs, not the target for which GCC is generating > >>> code. > >>> > >>> That implies that the change in aix.h is wrong. aix.h is for the > >>> target, not the host -- you don't want to define something like > >>> HOST_STAT_FOR_64BIT_INODES there. > >>> > >>> You'd want to be triggering this behavior via a host fragment, x-aix, or > >>> better yet via an autoconf test. > >> Indeed, would this version be better ? I'm not sure about the configure > >> test. > >> But as we are retrieving the size of dev_t and ino_t just above, I'm > >> assuming > >> that the one being used in stat directly. At least, that's the case on > >> AIX, and > >> this test is only made for AIX. > > It's a clear improvement. It's still checking for the aix target though: > > > > +# Select the right stat being able to handle 64bit inodes, if needed. > > +if test "$enable_largefile" != no; then > > + case "$target" in > > + *-*-aix*) > > + if test "$ac_cv_sizeof_ino_t" == "4" -a "$ac_cv_sizeof_dev_t" == > > 4; then > > + > > +$as_echo "#define HOST_STAT_FOR_64BIT_INODES stat64x" >>confdefs.h > > + > > + fi;; > > + esac > > +fi > > > > Again, we're dealing with a host property. You might be able to just > > change $target above to $host. Hmm, that makes me wonder about canadian > > crosses where host != build. We may need to do this for both the aix > > host and aix build. > > Yes, my bad, I've updated the case. I don't know if there is a usual way > to check both $build and $host. I've tried to avoid code duplication so > tell me if it's okay or if you'd rather have a case for $build and one > for $host. > > Thanks, > Clément
