I am trying to write a Linux kernel module with CLion. This is the cmake file:
cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 3.5)
project(labs)
set(KERNEL_HEADERS
/home/alex/Developer/linux/include
/home/alex/Developer/linux/arch/x86/include
/home/alex/Developer/linux/arch/x86/include/generated
/home/alex/Developer/linux/include/uapi
/home/alex/Developer/linux/include/generated/uapi
/home/alex/Developer/linux/arch/x86/include/uapi
/home/alex/Developer/linux/arch/x86/include/generated/uapi
)
set(MY_MODULE_SOURCES
chapter_03/lab_01/hello.c
)
add_definitions(-imacros /home/alex/Developer/linux/include/linux/kconfig.h)
add_definitions(-D__KERNEL__)
add_definitions(-DMODULE)
add_definitions(-std=gnu89)
include_directories(${KERNEL_HEADERS})
add_custom_target(labs COMMAND $(MAKE) -C ${labs_SOURCE_DIR}
PWD=${labs_SOURCE_DIR})
add_library(dummylib ${MY_MODULE_SOURCES})
The actual building of the kernel module is done with the externally called makefile using "add_custom_target". The "dummylib" is only there so that CLion actually starts to parse the header files and gives me auto completion. With my supplied definitions it does even compile the "dummylib" successfully (look at the screenshot). It is no kernel module though, but that does not matter ;)
My problem is the error you see in the screenshot. Somehow it says that it can't resolve all the macros defined in the kernel headers. Functions, structs and plain defines ( "MODULE_SIG_STRING ") do work (as you see). I do not understand why the editor says it cannot resolve the macro but can still build it. What is more strange is that I can even jump to the declaration using STRG+B of the marked macros. Clearly something is going wrong. The macros are really defined within linux/module.h.
Update
When I set -std=c89 instead of -std=gnu89 the editor recognizes the macros but the "dummylib" of course fails to build since the kernel needs the gnu extensions. I guess this is a bug in CLion. I posted it at the Jetbrains Bugtracker: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/CPP-6875
Related
I am attempting to build a project that comes with an automake/autoconf build system. This is a well-used project, so I'm skeptical about a problem with the configure scripts, makefiles, or code as I received them. It is likely some kind of environment, path, flag, etc problem - something on my end with simply running the right commands with the right parameters.
The configuration step seems to complete in a satisfactory way. When I run make, I'm shown a set of errors primarily of these types:
error: ‘TRUE’ undeclared here (not in a function)
error: ‘struct work’ has no member named ‘version’
error: expected ‘)’ before ‘PRIu64’
Let's focus on the last one, which I have spent time researching - and I suspect all the errors are related to missing definitions. Apparently the print-friendly extended definitions from the C standard library header file inttypes.h is not being found. However, in the configure step everything is claimed to be in order:
configure:4930: checking for inttypes.h
configure:4930: /usr/bin/x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc -c -g -O2 conftest.c >&5
configure:4930: $? = 0
configure:4930: result: yes
All the INTTYPES flags are set correctly if I look in confdefs.h, config.h, config.log Output Variables, etc:
HAVE_INTTYPES_H='1'
#define HAVE_INTTYPES_H 1
The problem is the same whether doing a native build, or cross-compiling (for arm-linux-gnueabihf, aka armhf).
The source .c file in question does have config.h included as you'd expect, which by my understanding via the m4 macros mechanic should be adding an
#include <inttypes.h>
line. Yes, as you may be inclined to ask, if I enter this line myself into the .c file it appears to work and the PRIu64 errors go away.
I'm left with wondering how to debug this type of problem - essentially, everything I am aware of tells me I've done the configure properly, but I'm left with a bogus make process. Aside from trying every ./configure tweak and trick I can find, I've started looking at the auto-generated Makefile.in itself, but nothing so far. Also looking into how I can get the C pre-processor to tell me which header files it's actually inserting.
EDIT: I've confirmed that the -DHAVE_CONFIG_H mechanic looks good through configure, config.log, Makefile, etc.
autoconf does not automatically produce #include directives. You need to do that on your own based on the HAVE_* macros. So you'll have to add something like this:
#ifdef HAVE_INTTYPES_H
# include <inttypes.h>
#endif
If these lines show up in confdefs.h, a temporary header file used by configure scripts, this does excuse your application from performing these #includes. If configure writes them to confdefs.h, this is solely for the benefit of other configure tests, and not for application use.
First, run make -n for the target that failed. This is probably some .o file; you may need some tweaking to get its path correctly.
Now you have the command used to compile your file. If you don't find the problem by meditating on this command, try to run it, adding the -E to force preprocessor output text instead of invoking the compiler.
Note that now the .o file will be text, and you must rebuild it without -E later.
You may find some preprocessor flags useful to get more details: -dM or -dD, or others.
I'm trying to debug some additions I made to a fairly large c program using gdb. The program I'm trying to debug makes extensive use of #define statements to set different values that are used throughout the code. I need to be able to see what these values are in order to help my debugging (as they include some very important information.
After some digging around I found that the info macro FOO and macro expand FOO commands should be able to print these values if the -g3 option (also tried the -gdwarf-2 and -ggdb3 flags as well) is passed to the compiler (as discussed here). However, whenever I try using this I get
The symbol `FOO' has no definition as a C/C++ preprocessor macro
at <user-defined>:-1
Now, I'm sure that the macro is defined otherwise the previous line of code would not have been able to run. In addition, I'm certain that I have passed the -g3 flag to the compiler. I have one idea as to where the issue might be and that is the location that the macro is defined at. Currently the macro is defined in a header file that is not in the same directory as the rest of the files (i.e. if the source files are in /foo/bar/blam/.. then the macro is defined in /def/mac/here/. Given this I thought maybe the problem was that gdb didn't know to look in this directory so I tried issuing the directory command in gdb and gave it the path to the directory containing the header file (base on this). This still did not solve the problem.
Does anyone know how I can get the values of these macros? If it is pertinent I'm running gdb version 7.11 and compiling the program using
cc and gcc both with Apple LLVM version 7.0.2 (clang-700.1.81). Also, gdb was installed/built using homebrew.
I'm trying to get started learning basic assembly with Paul A. Carter's book "PC Assembly Language." However I'm unable to run the first example Carter provides, so I'm kind of stuck until I figure this out.
I assembled the example "first.asm" without any problem, but I can't figure out how to link these files: first.obj, driver.c, asm_io.obj into an executable. In the comment section of first.asm Carter gives these instructions for creating an executable (I'm using Windows 10, VS community 2015 developer command prompt):
; Using MS C/C++
; nasm -f win32 first.asm
; cl first.obj driver.c asm_io.obj
I'm doing exactly that but I'm getting a fatal error 2 unresolved externals, _printf and _scanf. I have every necessary file that I can think of in the same directory, and I'm compiling in that directory.
Driver.c calls the function defined in and it uses a header file called "CDECL.h"; I have this file in my directory, but I don't understand much about this header file. I wonder if the problem is here. I haven't altered it or anything. I assembled asm_io.asm according to Dr. Carter's instructions.
Not too far into asm_io.asm is see this:
extern _scanf, _printf, _getchar, _putchar, _fputs
So here are the unresolved externals. Shouldn't they be defined in stdio.h? Driver.c includes stdio.h, shouldn't the linker be able to resolve these symbols be looking at stdio.h? What might I be missing?
ps. I'm new to programming in general, and this is my first stack overflow question. I'm open to any and all criticism/feedback. I'll provide more information if you need it, I just didn't want to post a massive wall of text and code if not necessary.
Welcome to SO. You need to understand:-
The difference between a header file, e.g.
foo.h // C or maybe C++ header file)
and a library, e.g.
foo.lib foo.dll // Windows
libfoo.a, libfoo.so // Unix/Linux
that implements the calling interface that is (merely) described in a header file.
The difference between compiling or assembling a source file, e.g.
bar.c // C source file
bar.asm // Assembly source, Windows
bar.s // Assembly source, Unix/Linux
to make an object file. e.g.
bar.obj // Windows
bar.o // Unix/Linux
and linking object files and libraries together make a complete executable.
Linking can succeed only if the linker is supplied with (or knows by default)
the names and locations of object files and/or libraries that provide
implementations of all the functions that are called in the program - including
functions whose calling interfaces are described in header files. Otherwise
unresolved symbol errors ensue.
Research these points and you'll quickly get yourself unstuck. See this
pretty good introductory tutorial, which although it is about getting
started with the GNU Compiler Collection rather
than with assembly language programming, will clarify the principles
and distinctions you need to grasp.
I was using Fortran g77 and experienced this problem:
c this program calculates runoff and sediment
1 2
Unrecognized statement name at (1) and invalid form for assignment or statement-function definition at (2)
Also, the compiler can recognized only .for file extension, not .f.
Does anyone know, where is the problem? I downloaded it from http://www.cse.yorku.ca/~roumani/fortran/ftn.htm.
The compiler is not recognizing that statement as a comment. As a comment it should ignore the line but it is trying parse it. Are you sure that the "C" is in the first column?
Why are you using g77? It hasn't been supported for years. gfortran is the current GNU Fortran compiler. It can compile FORTRAN 77, Fortran 90, 95 and portions of 2003 and 2008.
EDIT: Perhaps its wants an upper-case "C".
The page you have linked to states that the f2exe wrapper passes -ffree-form to the compiler:
Compilation Command
The above f2exe command is just a batch file that invokes g77, the "real" compilation command. The command:
g77 -ffree-form prog.for -oprog.exe
directs the compiler to compile the file prog.for and stores the output in the file prog.exe. The -ffree-form switch indicates free-form style (remove it if you are using the old style).
In free-form Fortran the only allowed comment format is that of a line starting with !. As a matter of fact, this is also written on the same page directly under the above text:
Comments
In free-form style, use ! for both full-line and in-line comments. In the old style, use a "C" in column-1.
If you are not using the provided f2exe wrapper, don't pass -ffree-form option when compiling fixed-form FORTRAN 77 code.
I'll assume you want to stick with this compiler.
As noted above, the problems you have come from using the F2EXE batch file, which is not very useful: first it automatically adds ".for" to the file name, so you can't compile ".f" files, and it assumes free-form syntax, which is unusual when programming in Fortran 77 (and if you want Fortran 90, find another compiler, other answers give you links).
Now, suppose you have written a program myprogram.f, and you are in a Windows command line, in the same directory where the program resides (use "cd C:\mydirectory" for example, to change)
You will compile with
g77 myprogram.f
If you use SLATEC, you use
g77 myprogram.f -lslatec
If you want to specify a name for your .exe file (default is a.exe), you write
g77 myprogram.f -o myprogram.exe
There are other useful options
g77 -O2 myprogram.f to optimize (within g77 2.95 limitations)
g77 -Wall myprogram.f to enable all compiler warnings, very useful
to find errors in your code
g77 -c myprogram.f to only compile (you get a .o file), this is
useful to compile functions and subroutines, to
later build a static library (.a file), like
libslatec.a which is given with the compiler
And to build a library, using ar.exe:
ar cru mylib.a myfunc1.o myfnuc2.o ...
Then you can use is with
g77 myprogram.f mylib.a
G77 runs in command line under Windows. You write programs in a text editor.
Notepad++ is fairly good and its free. See http://notepad-plus-plus.org/
If you have problems with compilation, maybe it comes from environment variables, so here are some precisions. You have to tell Windows where to find the G77 compiler (g77.exe).
You can follow instructions on the site where you downloaded it to change Windows' environment variables PATH and LIBRARY_PATH. It needs you install the compiler in the C:\F directory : that is, you will have C:\F\G77\bin, etc.
Slight modification to the instructions on that page :
You should set PATH to C:\F\G77\bin
And LIBRARY_PATH to C:\F\G77\lib;C:\F\SLATEC\lib
This modification to LIBRARY_PATH allows you to compile with SLATEC simply with "-lslatec" as above.
A note about the compiler. It's G77, also know as GNU Fortran 77. An old compiler, integrated with the well known GCC suite until GCC 3.4.6 (we are at GCC 4.7.2 now). And the compiler you downloaded is for version GCC 2.95.
It's a good Fortran 77 compiler, but it's not very well optimized, and of course, you don't get any support for new processor features such as Intel SSE.
Modern Fortran compilers can still understand most if not all of Fortran 77, plus all the newer features of Fortran 90 and newer standards, which are extremely useful.
It may also be interesting to know there is another place to download the same compiler (eccept there is no SLATEC), just in case the page gets destroyed :
http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/software/g77.html
I'm trying to compile version 7.16 of sc, the ncurses spreadsheet calculator, for cygwin. Compilation fails due to undefined references: nmgetch, kbd_again, initkbd, and resetkbd. Google search, and grepping a Ubuntu machine with apt-get-installed sc, has got me nowhere. Does anyone recognise these names?
in fact I was able to compile and get arrow keys working,
the right CFLASG to put in the Makefile is :
CFLAGS=-DSYSV3 -I/usr/include/ncurses/
You don't need to change the SIMPLE= variable (you can leave it as it is in Makefile)
If you leave the -O2 and -pipe flags your SC won't be working properly (it won't process editing options - syntax error)
These functions are defined within sc. They are required to build sc, but undefined by default. If the C preprocessor macro, SIMPLE, is defined, a "simple" implementation of these functions is enabled. So call make as follows, to allow it to find cygwin's curses.h:
make CFLAGS=-I/usr/include/ncurses SIMPLE=-DSIMPLE
But now the arrow keys don't move the cursor.