Re: [PATCH] migration: Remove time_t cast for OpenBSD

[Brad Smith <brad@comstyle.com>]

On 4/1/2021 4:14 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 03:26:16PM -0400, Brad Smith wrote:
>> On 3/13/2021 6:33 PM, Brad Smith wrote:
>>> On 3/11/2021 1:39 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 06:28:57PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>>>>> * Laurent Vivier (laurent@vivier.eu) wrote:
>>>>>> Le 08/03/2021 à 12:46, Thomas Huth a écrit :
>>>>>>> On 22/02/2021 08.28, Brad Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>> OpenBSD has supported 64-bit time_t across all archs
>>>>>>>> since 5.5 released in 2014.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Remove a time_t cast that is no longer necessary.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Brad Smith <brad@comstyle.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/migration/savevm.c b/migration/savevm.c
>>>>>>>> index 52e2d72e4b..9557f85ba9 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/migration/savevm.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/migration/savevm.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -2849,8 +2849,7 @@ bool save_snapshot(const char
>>>>>>>> *name, bool overwrite, const char *vmstate,
>>>>>>>>       if (name) {
>>>>>>>>           pstrcpy(sn->name, sizeof(sn->name), name);
>>>>>>>>       } else {
>>>>>>>> -        /* cast below needed for OpenBSD where
>>>>>>>> tv_sec is still 'long' */
>>>>>>>> -        localtime_r((const time_t *)&tv.tv_sec, &tm);
>>>>>>>> +        localtime_r(&tv.tv_sec, &tm);
>>>>>>>>           strftime(sn->name, sizeof(sn->name),
>>>>>>>> "vm-%Y%m%d%H%M%S", &tm);
>>>>>>>>       }
>>>>>> but the qemu_timeval from "include/sysemu/os-win32.h" still
>>>>>> uses a long: is this file compiled for
>>>>>> win32?
>>>>> Yep this fails for me when built with x86_64-w64-mingw32- (it's fine
>>>>> with i686-w64-mingw32- )
>>>> We could just switch the code to use GDateTime from GLib and thus
>>>> avoid portability issues. I think this should be equivalent:
>>>>
>>>>       g_autoptr(GDateTime) now = g_date_time_new_now_local();
>>>>       g_autofree char *nowstr = g_date_time_format(now,
>>>> "vm-%Y%m%d%H%M%s");
>>>>       strncpy(sn->name, sizeof(sn->name), nowstr);
>>> Which way do you guys want to go? Something like above, remove the
>>> comment
>>> or some variation on the comment but not mentioning OpenBSD since it is
>>> no
>>> longer relevant?
>> Anyone?
> Personally I always favour using GLib APIs if there's an applicable one,
> since it eliminates portability problems - or rather offloads them to
> the GLib maintainers, who have already solved them generally.

Can you please submit a proper diff and I'll drop this?