RTEMS | Draft: Support for building RTEMS with LLVM toolchains (!1539)

[Sebastian Huber (@sebhub)]

Sebastian Huber started a new discussion on cpukit/libmisc/stackchk/check.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1539#note_161206

 >    );
 >  }
 >  
 > +/*
 > + * Provide a weak default so that code pulling in check.c (e.g. via the
 > + * "stackuse" shell command) links successfully even when the application has
 > + * not defined CONFIGURE_STACK_CHECKER_ENABLED.  The strong definition
 > + * supplied by <rtems/confdefs/extensions.h> when CONFIGURE_STACK_CHECKER_ENABLED
 > + * is set will override this at link time.
 > + */
 > +const Stack_checker_Reporter_handler Stack_checker_Reporter
 > +  __attribute__((weak)) = rtems_stack_checker_reporter_quiet;

`<rtems/confdefs/extensions.h>` defines `Stack_checker_Reporter` when the application configures the stack checker. This weak definition lets an application link without that configuration. A missing configuration then does not give a link error. Which link failed without this definition, and why does it not fail with GCC?

-- 
View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1539#note_161206
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org. Unsubscribe from this thread: https://gitlab.rtems.org/-/namespace/49/sent_notifications/6-2i4vnvxcjdig4lspb7s4bejb1-1d/unsubscribe | Manage all notifications: https://gitlab.rtems.org/-/profile/notifications | Help: https://gitlab.rtems.org/help


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/bugs/attachments/20261016/fd0811b9/attachment.htm>