DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>,
	"Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] Eliminate zero length arrays in DPDK
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 23:41:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220217074139.GA1815@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YgzNeYi73AbVih45@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 10:10:01AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 11:05:09AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 16 February 2022 10.33
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 03:00:56PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > > Yet another case of applying Linux kernel best practices
> > > > to DPDK. Flexible arrays are supported by Clang, GCC and
> > > > Microsoft compilers (part of C99).
> > > >
> > > Do we need to start explicitly stating that DPDK uses C99 features, and
> > > adding -std=c99 to our build flags? Are we also requiring that
> > > applications
> > > are compiled with c99 features to use this (I would hope that they are,
> > > but
> > > I'm not sure we can mandate it).
> > 
> > No to -std=c99. It's >= C99 for applications; we should not prevent them from using a newer C standard.
> 
> Yes. For build flags, I was referring only to having it in the cflags for the
> build of DPDK itself, not for apps. We definitely need to minimise the
> build flags we expose to apps.
> 
> > 
> > Adding a note about the C standard version to the DPDK requirements
> > documentation would be very nice. It only mentions a certain compiler
> > version required. But I think that documenting the detailed build and
> > runtime requirements (and why they are that way) is another task.
> > 
> Sure, we should do that. I am just wanting to be sure that if we specify a
> minimum of C99, we won't get complaints back from those with legacy
> codebasees which only support C89/C90. I am therefore wondering if we need
> to have our public headers C90-compliant?

this seems to be the real question. what "minimum" C standard should be
documented as required to consume dpdk. we can obviously use any standard
we wish to build/provide binaries. similarly we ought to document a
minimum C++ standard for consumption.

i would advocate for C99 however before setting that in stone it is fair
to ask if there are any consumers using < C99.

we may also want to consider that the minimum required may differ
depending on the platform/port. though most differences in public interface
i would hope could be trivially abstracted though.

ty

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-17  7:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-15 23:00 Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-15 23:00 ` [RFC 1/2] devtools: add script to check for zero length array Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-15 23:00 ` [RFC 2/2] treewide: replace zero-length array with flex array Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-16  9:27 ` [RFC 0/2] Eliminate zero length arrays in DPDK Morten Brørup
2022-02-16  9:33 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-02-16 10:05   ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-16 10:10     ` Bruce Richardson
2022-02-17  7:41       ` Tyler Retzlaff [this message]
2022-02-24 21:51         ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-24 23:03           ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-16 18:56   ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-17  8:09 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2022-02-16 10:39 Morten Brørup
2022-02-17  8:32 ` Tyler Retzlaff

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20220217074139.GA1815@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net \
    --to=roretzla@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).