From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id CAu/Iv0LcGJk2QMAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 02 May 2022 12:51:09 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 84B221E058; Mon, 2 May 2022 12:51:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B4AA1E00D for ; Mon, 2 May 2022 12:51:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F534385800E for ; Mon, 2 May 2022 16:51:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com (mail-wr1-f48.google.com [209.85.221.48]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D00BA3858406 for ; Mon, 2 May 2022 16:50:44 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D00BA3858406 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=palves.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id e2so20281410wrh.7 for ; Mon, 02 May 2022 09:50:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=gb8llJNsQ6EwaRuaWKzUlBKRZQcz8mIK19yJzRdwoo8=; b=3MBQWI6GuV5S7McKLxDlNsrf76LMtiYmQrvTsJ5UOElCClVfPt11lTLJ4xFiRVbV5g k92M32g/kcl8dLkT1PRFHaTH2ogRwLcukfPYuE35ZvyGbyjCU1Y60n/KBk4Y6TTIDCcE JTD1lPNKk6gu8mVY7xo8GD2LtkrrQ68KzkrTEEviIsUvAsI4hmttPSM1sel7m2kNHzPx cni7bdCprc6is/iQtPzbtAjmbFmMy+lNnFcsVF59uUi7/0/A5tcYXfoDfs3lus+CN/dW imsObWlZbzdpx2YRUm9gvw0cHulKkFMkcP4Eea3lfwjOMW5JXgTiLCnIORKc0jwGQw2U Vhzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5339nfI1jjO4CyDYMppvxkqyNS3MmXWIzWJQ1zdrDDA9AhzhjGnt tJU3BOv4Z9/BMv0JvogTV3c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzm+VDdJZZcsatBpbY21abj4citEIX+ByBylnFltbUkwkefdNJp2R7PlzcSG/IACuXxQ2u6TQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5228:0:b0:20a:d7e9:7ed8 with SMTP id i8-20020a5d5228000000b0020ad7e97ed8mr9507219wra.687.1651510243730; Mon, 02 May 2022 09:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2001:8a0:f924:2600:209d:85e2:409e:8726? ([2001:8a0:f924:2600:209d:85e2:409e:8726]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p25-20020a05600c205900b00394431ac1a3sm1710119wmg.17.2022.05.02.09.50.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 May 2022 09:50:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6e8148d5-bba1-86e2-313c-b9e99042874c@palves.net> Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 17:50:41 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] get page size using sysconf (_SC_PAGESIZE) instead of PAGE_SIZE Content-Language: en-US To: Tom Tromey , Zied Guermazi References: <20220430121623.42196-1-zied.guermazi@trande.de> <20220430121623.42196-2-zied.guermazi@trande.de> <87sfprkhy6.fsf@tromey.com> From: Pedro Alves In-Reply-To: <87sfprkhy6.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2022-05-02 17:38, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Zied" == Zied Guermazi writes: > > Zied> PAGE_SIZE is not defined in all build configurations, e.g cross compiling > Zied> for aarch64 GNU/Linux machine. This patch gets the value at runtime using > Zied> posix call sysconf (_SC_PAGESIZE) > > Thanks. I think this is ok. Please don't merge it yet. Andreas' question is quite pertinent -- this file in only built on x86 hosts. The premise of the patch doesn't seems strange offhand. Is the Aarch64 port going to start using linux-btrace.c? That isn't clear.