From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BAD1A2EFC for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:41:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1848A1D165; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:41:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D2591D163 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:41:44 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Oct 2019 09:41:43 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.67,296,1566889200"; d="scan'208";a="189073670" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.95]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 14 Oct 2019 09:41:41 -0700 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 17:41:38 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Jerin Jacob Cc: dpdk-dev Message-ID: <20191014164138.GB1394@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20191014113448.7442-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20191014113448.7442-5-bruce.richardson@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/8] examples/performance-thread: rename directory to standard 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" On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 09:46:50PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 5:05 PM Bruce Richardson > wrote: > > > > In other places in DPDK, e.g. EAL, the architecture-specific files for arm > > are just stored in a folder called "arm". Rename the "arm64" folder for > > performance thread example to align to this naming. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson > > --- > > examples/performance-thread/common/arch/{arm64 => arm}/ctx.c | 0 > > examples/performance-thread/common/arch/{arm64 => arm}/ctx.h | 0 > > examples/performance-thread/common/arch/{arm64 => arm}/stack.h | 0 > > examples/performance-thread/common/common.mk | 2 +- > > 4 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > rename examples/performance-thread/common/arch/{arm64 => arm}/ctx.c (100%) > > This code only works for arm64 as it is storing and restoring arm64 registers. > armv7 registers are different so this code does not work for the generic arm. > > arm64 specific code, we always named as arm64 > > F: lib/librte_hash/rte*_arm64.h > F: lib/librte_efd/rte*_arm64.h > F: lib/librte_table/rte*_arm64.h > > IMO, If armv7 support adds in future then we can change the directory > as arch/arm > and have ctx_64.c and ctx_32.c etc. I think, for now, technically it > is correct to call the directory as arm64 Ok, fair enough. The code isn't meant to build for ARMv7 so I thought I'd save some logic by just using x86 and arm, rather than having to compute the directory names individually. I'll rework the patch. /Bruce