Re: [PATCH] improve hack in src/base/TextException.h

On 21/02/11 16:40, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 02/18/2011 05:43 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> On 19/02/11 11:25, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>>> On 01/31/2011 07:17 AM, Kinkie wrote:
>>>> TextException.h includes an hack to avoid the compiler noticing that
>>>> there are multiple instances of FileNameHashCached() in the compiled
>>>> binary.
>>>> Intel's icc doesn't like the way it is implemented, and instead of
>>>> trying to figure out how to have it stop complaining, I propose to use
>>>> a specific-purpose gcc construct, as done in this patch. Thoughts?
>>>> Votes?
>>>
>>> What does icc complain about? Kind of hard to agree to add more crap
>>> without seeing what the real problem that needs fixing is...
>>>
>>> Alex.
>>
>> Current trunk with the patch reverted fails on ICC showing:
>>
>> ../../../src/base/TextException.h(66): error #42: operand types are
>> incompatible ("void *" and "unsigned int (*)(const char *)")
>> bool use(void *ptr=(__null)) { return ptr !=&FileNameHashCached;}
>>
>>
>> With a marker pointing at the != comparison.
>
> Looks like casting&FileNameHashCached to (void*) would fix this.
>
>
>> If you have any alternative fix ideas the 3.ALPHA-patch job in hudson
>> works. You just have to include reversal of the rev11236 change since it
>> has already been committed.
>
> Sorry, I am not sure I understand the above. Should I reverse r11236 and
> commit a casting fix? Or do you want be to post a patch that some Hudson
> job will pick up and test somehow first?

This is what I mean....

To test that suspected fix:
  (on a checkout of trunk with nothing pending)

  bzr revert -c11236 .
  ... edit the new fix into files
  bzr diff >test.patch
  ... login to Hudson
  ... click on "build job" for 3.ALPHA-PATCH-amd64-CentOs-icc
  ... upload test.patch as the file and set your email address to get
the results.

It takes about 10 minutes to reach that file. You get an email report of
what is now causing the failure, anything past base/TextException.h and
it has worked.

If it fails you can revert change on your checkout and no harm done.

:-) no trunk commit until it is confirmed. :-)

repeat the build step on the other 3.ALPHA jobs if you want portability
confirmation.

Amos

-- 
Please be using
   Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE9 or 3.1.11
   Beta testers wanted for 3.2.0.5