Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Build failure on Linux (GCC 3.4.6)

["Martin Mathieson" <martin.r.mathieson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 4, 2008, at 6:03 AM, Martin Mathieson wrote:

> Unfortunately not.  I can't see what is different between this case
> and the one in the built-in packet-ethertype.c which may have been
> used as a template in part for the plugin packet-infiniband.c.

packet-ethertype.c has

       tvbuff_t *volatile next_tvb;

in ethertype(), while packet-infiniband.c has

       tvbuff_t *next_tvb;

I *really* should've spotted that.
 

in parse_PAYLOAD().  What happens if you change it to

       tvbuff_t *volatile next_tvb;

in parse_PAYLOAD()?

That compiles without warning for me.
 

(No, I don't know why it's not failing on the Ubuntu buildbot, unless
either

       1) you're building for some RISC architecture with more than 16
registers, and next_tvb doesn't end up in a register on x86-64 but
does end up in a register on the architecture for which you're building

Nothing exotic:

ukeng7 martinm main : cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 15
model           : 4
model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.40GHz

etc.
 

or

       2) GCC 3.4.6 isn't clever enough to figure out that next_tvb won't
change between the setjmp and longjmp but the version of GCC on the
Ubuntu 7.10 buildbot (my Ubuntu 7.10 virtual machine has a
"prerelease" of GCC 4.1.3) is.)

Would checking in a change to make next_tvb be volatile (or even static, as I had it) be acceptable?  (I have no immediate interest in infiniband, and couldn't begin to guess how many people this might affect)

Thanks,
Martin
 

_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev