Re: [PATCH] Fix build on MINGW on ARM64
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Fix build on MINGW on ARM64 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 91e3ec76-ac83-4c6b-8bec-3c7c346b4c8d@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Fix build on MINGW on ARM64 (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Fix build on MINGW on ARM64
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-04-01 Tu 8:47 AM, vignesh C wrote: > On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 at 16:02, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: >> >> On 2025-04-01 Tu 5:16 AM, vignesh C wrote: >>> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 00:52, Lars Kanis <lars@greiz-reinsdorf.de> wrote: >>>> This patch limits the workaround of using __buildin_setjmp on the >>>> Windows MINGW platform. This workaround is only necessary for legacy >>>> MSVCRT based toolchain, but not for UCRT based. It is not available at >>>> all on clang on ARM64 resulting in the following compiler error: >>>> >>>> error: __builtin_longjmp is not supported for the current target >>>> >>>> This patch is used since years in MSYS2 packages: >>>> https://github.com/msys2/MINGW-packages/blob/master/mingw-w64-postgresql/postgresql-14.0-use-mingw-setjmp-on-ucrt.patch >>>> >>>> It is also used in ruby-pg to allow compiling for >>>> aarch64-w64-windows-gnu: https://github.com/ged/ruby-pg/pull/626/files >>>> >>>> It would be nice if this patch could be merged upstream. >>> Are there any known issues with using __builtin_setjmp? I'm asking >>> because the comment mentions about the long standing issues in its >>> setjmp "However, it seems that MinGW-64 has some longstanding issues >>> in its setjmp support, so on that toolchain we cheat and use gcc's >>> builtins. Also few users have reported segfaults when using setjmp >>> with MinGW as in [1]. >>> [1] - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/53709069/setjmp-longjmp-in-x86-64-w64-mingw32 >>> >> That report is from quite a few years ago, so I'm not sure it really helps. >> >> If one of you would add this to the next CF we could see how the CFbot >> reacts to it. In general it looks sane. > There is an existing CF entry for this at [1]. If no one picks this > till the end of this CF, we can move it to next CF. > [1] - https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5610/ > Somehow I missed that. OK, looks good, will commit shortly. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: