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 1DA18A04DB; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:40:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC9CC1C0AF; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:40:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FDA11C01F for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:40:47 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: JoDvRd8XwS48SPP2XxAa8OKSpWGJ81Ev10T4zma0KzgACRQpcKl0d+Kg3Gv/x3COCOjYTuiOgY S6yRuOtT4HUA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9711"; a="215530197" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,305,1592895600"; d="scan'208";a="215530197" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Aug 2020 09:40:47 -0700 IronPort-SDR: Im6mqEFv7y1j5KL5nNa30wufbZ1C+xNKdmeKO0swf7ttv5KHyqHDT0tCxa7ts86P90IM/5nqNB J+qjaag8WpwQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,305,1592895600"; d="scan'208";a="439440734" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.255.202.43]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 12 Aug 2020 09:40:43 -0700 Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 17:40:38 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Jerin Jacob Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= Rivet , Ferruh Yigit , Ciara Power , dpdk-dev , Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20200812164038.GJ312@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20200807123009.21266-1-ciara.power@intel.com> <20200807123009.21266-3-ciara.power@intel.com> <20200807124536.GA302@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <20200807132343.GA306@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <20200807150553.ujvph5i5jzuu77ok@u256.net> <20200812155032.GH312@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 20.11 02/19] build: remove makefiles and mk directory 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 Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 09:42:30PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 9:20 PM Bruce Richardson > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 05:05:53PM +0200, Gaėtan Rivet wrote: > > > On 07/08/20 19:31 +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 7:04 PM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 8/7/2020 2:23 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 06:49:47PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > > > > >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 6:15 PM Bruce Richardson > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 01:29:52PM +0100, Ciara Power wrote: > > > > > >>>> It was decided [1] to no longer support Make in DPDK, this patch > > > > > >>>> removes all Makefiles that do not make use of pkg-config, along with > > > > > >>>> the mk directory previously used by make. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> [1] https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-April/162839.html > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ciara Power > > > > > >>>> --- > > > > > >>>> GNUmakefile | 17 - > > > > > >>>> Makefile | 4 - > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Open question from me: > > > > > >>> Do we want to leave a dummy top-level makefile that prints instructions on > > > > > >>> build with meson and ninja - or even runs a build using them if they are > > > > > >>> installed? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Maybe we can keep "make tags" as well in top-level Makefile. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it better to point people directly to the script? My concern about > > > > > > having a makefile is that it may confuse people as to how to build DPDK. > > > > > > On the other side, there is a convenience aspect to having a makefile, so > > > > > > I'm open to being convinced either way. > > > > > > > > I was looking more of a convenience point of view. > > > > Can we check how other meson based projects deal with similar problems? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A dummy Makefile to print instructions may be helpful for people missed the > > > > > change, I am for having it. > > > > > > > > > > But I am dubious on extending it, like for tags, although I found it useful I > > > > > think we should integrate it to meson instead. > > > > > > > > I think, we can not integrate such stuff with meson. If we can with meson, > > > > I agree we should take that path. > > > > > > +1 to provide basic and short instructions to use meson when someone > > > tries to use make. > > > > > > On the other hand I think tag generation should not be part of the build > > > system. The only dependency of build-tags.sh on make is for `make > > > showconfigs`, they can probably be listed without using make. > > > > > > The scripts seems standalone, why keep make to call it? The config > > > target could be inferred if that's the issue? > > > > > We may not actually need to do anything if we don't want to, > > other than put some info in the docs. > > > > https://mesonbuild.com/Release-notes-for-0-53-0.html#source-tags-targets > > > > After running "meson build", "ninja -C build ctags" creates a tags file in > > the root directory of my git tree, which vim picks up and uses without > > problems. Admittedly this is from meson 0.53 onwards, but I'm not sure how > > much extra effort we need to put in to support older versions for > > developers. Anyone hacking the code is probably using up-to-date tools > > anyway, one hopes! > > > > Jerin, can you perhaps check to see if there are any problems with the > > meson-generated tags file or if we are missing anything major compared to > > the script-generated one? I would hope that it's pretty complete and that > > we can also drop our ctags script in future too, and avoid maintaining it. > > I just checked rte_pause definition for x86 build, It is picking up > x86, arm, ppc definition also. > so meson doesn't have that kind of tag level support like the script. > But I am OK to drop the script, if that's the path we are planning to take. > No strong opinion. > Well, if the script is more accurate, we should keep it for now then. /Bruce