[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [flashrom] compiling flashrom for Debian/kFreeBSD

Hi Robert,

thanks for testing that patch!

Am 24.02.2012 20:14 schrieb Robert Millan:
> Long time no see :-)


> El 24 de febrer de 2012 0:55, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
> <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net> ha escrit:
>> I have written a patch which should fix compilation and
>> hopefully also work during runtime.
> The patch works perfectly. However, some changes are gratuitous or inaccurate:
>> -#elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined (__DragonFly__)
>> +#elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__FreeBSD_kernel__) || defined (__DragonFly__)
>>  	if ((io_fd = open("/dev/io", O_RDWR)) < 0) {
>>  #else
>>  	if (iopl(3) != 0) {
> We have both interfaces. You can keep using iopl() if you like.

Hm. Is iopl(3) a feature present in the FreeBSd kernel or is it just
part of the compat layer presented by glibc?

>>  #if defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__DragonFly__)
>> +  /* Note that FreeBSD kernel with glibc does not have machine/cpufunc.h. */
>>    #include <machine/cpufunc.h>
>>    #define off64_t off_t
>>    #define lseek64 lseek
> Actually, we have machine/cpufunc.h (we have everything in machine/*
> actually).  The off_t / lseek defines after this look dangerous though
> (they collide with glibc definitions).

Comment has been replaced with
/* Note that FreeBSD kernel with glibc has conflicting out[bwl] definitions
 * in machine/cpufunc.h and sys/io.h. Use cpufunc.h only for plain FreeBSD.

>> A full build log would be nice to have so I can see any remaining build
>> issues.
> Attached (build.log).

Looks good, and works as intended.

>> If you could test if flashrom works (do NOT test flashrom on
>> laptops/notebooks/servers), that would be even better. Just run
>> flashrom -VV
> Attached (run.log).

The SFDP limitation you were hitting has been fixed a few minutes ago in
r1506 in flashrom svn.

If you have any other comments about my changes, please tell me.



Reply to: