Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove vestigial HAVE_LARGE_SNPRINTF_SUPPORT checks #103106

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024
Merged

Conversation

GrabYourPitchforks
Copy link
Member

This also silences a few CodeQL violations, since the tool thought this was shipping code. May as well delete unused code rather than add suppressions.

@@ -220,18 +220,6 @@ int main(void)
check_cxx_source_runs("
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

SSCANF_SUPPORT_ll can be deleted too.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see a possible reference to it here:
https://github.com/dotnet/diagnostics/blob/cc5eca29afa2d9cacf6700ddc8d843082b5955c6/src/shared/pal/src/cruntime/printf.cpp#L36-L40

Not sure whether line 37 or 39 should be preserved. Can you advise?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You link is for the PAL clone in dotnet/diagnostic repo. It may be still needed there.

The printf.cpp file does not exist in dotnet/runtime repo. We have been actively working on eliminating the PAL in dotnet/runtime repo. Many files that still exist in other PAL clones have been deleted in dotnet/runtime.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You link is for the PAL clone in dotnet/diagnostic repo. It may be still needed there. ... Many files that still exist in other PAL clones have been deleted in dotnet/runtime.

Right. I was concerned that if I deleted that clause from the runtime repo's cmake file, it would automatically be synced to the diagnostics repo's cmake file, potentially causing errors in that repo.

Are you saying that I don't need to worry about this? It's safe for me to delete the clause from the runtime repo's cmake file, and it won't negatively impact the diagnostics repo?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is safe to delete the clause from the runtime repo.

The PAL sync into diagnostic repo is done manually once in a blue moon. The next one will have to deal with printf.cpp deletion where SSCANF_SUPPORT_ll was used.

@GrabYourPitchforks
Copy link
Member Author

I guess CI went green overnight then? :)

@GrabYourPitchforks GrabYourPitchforks deleted the levib/cmake-cleanup branch June 7, 2024 21:54
@jkotas
Copy link
Member

jkotas commented Jun 7, 2024

Yes. The one failing let is a known issue.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants