[OE-core] [PATCH v2] systemd: upgrade to 243

[akuster808]

On 9/13/19 3:28 PM, Scott Murray wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Sep 2019, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 05:58:09PM -0400, Scott Murray wrote:
>>> ...
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0002-src-login-brightness.c-include-wait.h.patch
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
>>> +Include wait.h
>>> +
>>> +Fixes:
>>> +src/login/logind-brightness.c:158:85: error: 'WEXITED' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'WIFEXITED'?
>>> +  158 |         r = sd_event_add_child(w->manager->event, &w->child_event_source, w->child, WEXITED, on_brightness_writer_exit, w);
>>> +      |                                                                                     ^~~~~~~
>>> ...
>>> +--- a/src/login/logind-brightness.c
>>> ++++ b/src/login/logind-brightness.c
>>> +@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
>>> + /* SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1+ */
>>> +
>>> ++#include <wait.h>
>>> ...
>> This should be
>>   #include <sys/wait.h>
> Okay.
>
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0004-src-shared-cpu-set-util.h-add-__cpu_mask-definition.patch
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
>>> +Handle __cpu_mask usage
>>> +
>>> +Fixes errors:
>>> +
>>> +src/test/test-cpu-set-util.c:18:54: error: '__cpu_mask' undeclared (first use in this function)
>>> +src/test/test-sizeof.c:73:14: error: '__cpu_mask' undeclared (first use in this function)
>>> +
>>> +__cpu_mask is an internal type of glibc's cpu_set implementation, not
>>> +part of the POSIX definition, which is problematic when building with
>>> +musl, which does not define a matching type.  From inspection of musl's
>>> +sched.h, however, it is clear that the corresponding type would be long,
>>> +which does match glibc's actual __CPU_MASK_TYPE.  So, add a typedef to
>>> +cpu-set-util.h defining __cpu_mask appropriately.
>>> ...
>>> +--- a/src/shared/cpu-set-util.h
>>> ++++ b/src/shared/cpu-set-util.h
>>> +@@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
>>> + #include "macro.h"
>>> + #include "missing_syscall.h"
>>> +
>>> ++typedef long __cpu_mask;
>>> ...
>> Signed looks wrong.
> I went that way since the usage is all with sizeof, and both glibc and musl
> use sizeof(long) in their internal definitions of the set array.  The array
> element type is unsigned long and my comment is actually wrong since
> glibc's __CPU_MASK_TYPE is __SYSCALL_ULONG_TYPE, so I'll fix this.  I'll
> upload a v3 shortly.

When your happy with the series, I will through it on AB this weekend
for a testrun.

let me know.

- armin
> Thanks,
>
> Scott
>
>