Re: [PULL 00/14] Linux user for 5.2 patches

[Peter Maydell]

On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 at 07:51, Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu> wrote:
>
> The following changes since commit d0ed6a69d399ae193959225cdeaa9382746c91cc:
>
>   Update version for v5.1.0 release (2020-08-11 17:07:03 +0100)
>
> are available in the Git repository at:
>
>   git://github.com/vivier/qemu.git tags/linux-user-for-5.2-pull-request
>
> for you to fetch changes up to 04275cad60c8f99e0dd7f56aecda68ceac926da8:
>
>   linux-user: Fix 'utimensat()' implementation (2020-08-12 10:09:58 +0200)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Add btrfs ioctls
> Add clock_getres_time64, timer_gettime64, timer_settime64,
>     timerfd_gettime64, timerfd_settime64
> Some fixes (page protection, print_fdset, timerspec, itimerspec)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------

Fails to compile:

../../linux-user/syscall_types.h:407:28: error:
‘BTRFS_INO_LOOKUP_USER_PATH_MAX’ undeclared here (not in a function);
did you mean ‘BTRFS_INO_LOOKUP_PATH_MAX’?
        MK_ARRAY(TYPE_CHAR, BTRFS_INO_LOOKUP_USER_PATH_MAX)) /* path */
                            ^

../../linux-user/syscall_types.h:451:17: error:
‘BTRFS_MAX_ROOTREF_BUFFER_NUM’ undeclared here (not in a function)
                 BTRFS_MAX_ROOTREF_BUFFER_NUM), /* rootref */
                 ^

On PPC, even more errors, relating to not having
BTRFS_PATH_NAME_MAX, PTRFS_VOL_NAME_MAX, etc.

Not sure if this was a semantic conflict with the meson
conversion, or just an assumption of a newer btrfs.h
than some systems have.

thanks
-- PMM