From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6587C10A3 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 03:50:18 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Mar 2019 19:50:16 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,256,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="285558316" Received: from yexl-server.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.67.110.206]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Mar 2019 19:50:15 -0700 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 10:45:59 +0800 From: Ye Xiaolong To: Luca Boccassi Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Qi Zhang , "Karlsson, Magnus" Message-ID: <20190325024559.GB35864@intel.com> References: <20190301080947.91086-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20190301080947.91086-2-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20190302081407.GD100586@intel.com> <20190317033425.GA103486@intel.com> <1553429237.20876.3.camel@debian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1553429237.20876.3.camel@debian.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/6] net/af_xdp: introduce AF_XDP PMD driver X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 02:50:19 -0000 On 03/24, Luca Boccassi wrote: >On Sun, 2019-03-17 at 11:34 +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> On 03/02, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> > > >  _LDLIBS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_PACKET)  += >> > > > -lrte_pmd_af_packet >> > > > +_LDLIBS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_XDP)     += >> > > > -lrte_pmd_af_xdp >> > > > -lelf -lbpf >> > > >> > > Are symbols from libelf being used by the PMD? >> > >> > Hmm, it is a leftover of RFC, libelf is no longer needed in this >> > version, will >> > remove it in next version. >> > >> >> Correction, libelf is needed for libbpf, so we still need to keep >> it.  > >If libbpf needs libelf for its internal usage, it should be linked >against it itself. Unless symbols from libelf are used in static >functions defined in libbpf's public headers. Is this the case? > Yes, that's the case. without the libelf, it would have build error as below, and these symbols are used in static functions of libbpf. /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_nextscn' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_rawdata' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_memory' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getrel' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_strptr' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_end' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_getscn' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_begin' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getsym' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_version' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getehdr' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_getdata' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getshdr' Thanks, Xiaolong >-- >Kind regards, >Luca Boccassi From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB6DDA05D3 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 03:50:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF7211A4; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 03:50:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6587C10A3 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 03:50:18 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Mar 2019 19:50:16 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,256,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="285558316" Received: from yexl-server.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.67.110.206]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Mar 2019 19:50:15 -0700 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 10:45:59 +0800 From: Ye Xiaolong To: Luca Boccassi Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Qi Zhang , "Karlsson, Magnus" Message-ID: <20190325024559.GB35864@intel.com> References: <20190301080947.91086-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20190301080947.91086-2-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20190302081407.GD100586@intel.com> <20190317033425.GA103486@intel.com> <1553429237.20876.3.camel@debian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1553429237.20876.3.camel@debian.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/6] net/af_xdp: introduce AF_XDP PMD driver X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Message-ID: <20190325024559.ujgtL_svAgr7XVxEW4IlwQNzjb3m_Cy7ISpnhXHbins@z> On 03/24, Luca Boccassi wrote: >On Sun, 2019-03-17 at 11:34 +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> On 03/02, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> > > >  _LDLIBS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_PACKET)  += >> > > > -lrte_pmd_af_packet >> > > > +_LDLIBS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_XDP)     += >> > > > -lrte_pmd_af_xdp >> > > > -lelf -lbpf >> > > >> > > Are symbols from libelf being used by the PMD? >> > >> > Hmm, it is a leftover of RFC, libelf is no longer needed in this >> > version, will >> > remove it in next version. >> > >> >> Correction, libelf is needed for libbpf, so we still need to keep >> it.  > >If libbpf needs libelf for its internal usage, it should be linked >against it itself. Unless symbols from libelf are used in static >functions defined in libbpf's public headers. Is this the case? > Yes, that's the case. without the libelf, it would have build error as below, and these symbols are used in static functions of libbpf. /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_nextscn' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_rawdata' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_memory' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getrel' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_strptr' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_end' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_getscn' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_begin' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getsym' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_version' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getehdr' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `elf_getdata' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.5/../../../../lib64/libbpf.so: undefined reference to `gelf_getshdr' Thanks, Xiaolong >-- >Kind regards, >Luca Boccassi