Re: [PATCH] newlib: riscv: Fix build

On 3/26/25 8:28 AM, Eric Salem wrote:
> On 3/25/25 9:15 PM, Eric Salem wrote:
>> Hi Kito,
>>
>> On 3/25/25 8:39 PM, Kito Cheng wrote:
>>> Just one more comment, don't put xlenint.h in
>>> newlib/libc/machine/riscv/sys, please move that into
>>> newlib/libc/machine/riscv
>>> The difference between the two is that the former will be installed
>>> into the toolchain, but the latter one won't.
>>>
>>> Otherwise LGTM, also verified on my side :)
>>
>> I'm trying to move the file to that directory, but now the problem I'm
>> facing is sys/string.h in riscv can no longer find the file. Newlib
>> copies the header files to the targ-include directory when building,
>> but only those that are in the machine and sys directories. So when I go
>> to build, it can't find xlenint.h anymore.
>>
>> Any suggestions? Perhaps I'm doing something wrong, but looking at the
>> file layout of other ports, this seems intentional by Newlib, where the
>> libc/machine/<port> directories contain C and assembly files, and all
>> header files go in subdirectories.
>>
>> Eric
> 
> It looks like if I add the path to Makefile.am, this could work. I'll dig
> into it today.

I'm a little concerned about making this change. If you run the following
find command in newlib/libc/machine:

find -maxdepth 2 -iname "*.h"

You'll see all the header files contained in each newlib/libc/machine/<port>
directory:

./aarch64/asmdefs.h
./amdgcn/exit-value.h
./arc/asm.h
./arm/arm_asm.h
./h8300/defines.h
./h8300/setarch.h
./hppa/DEFS.h
./i386/i386mach.h
./m68k/m68kasm.h
./microblaze/mb_endian.h
./powerpc/fix64.h
./sh/asm.h
./spu/c99ppe.h
./spu/ea_internal.h
./spu/spu_timer_internal.h
./spu/straddr.h
./spu/strcpy.h
./spu/strncmp.h
./spu/vec_literal.h
./visium/memcpy.h
./visium/memset.h
./x86_64/x86_64mach.h
./xtensa/xtensa-asm.h
./z8k/args.h

If Makefile.am is updated to copy all header files in <port> to targ-include,
I don't know what the consequences would be for each port, and there's no
practical way for me to thoroughly test this.

To reiterate, it's not a C or assembly file in <port> that's including a header
file that would also be located in <port>. It's a header file (in this case)
in <port>/sys that needs to also include a header file currently located in
<port>/sys (currently how the patch would work).

What does everyone think? I think keeping the new xlenint.h header file in
<port>/sys would be the safer option.

Eric