DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>,
	"viktorin@rehivetech.com" <viktorin@rehivetech.com>,
	"bruce.richardson@intel.com" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	"stephen@networkplumber.org" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	"juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech" <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] build: add missing arch define for Arm
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:50:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2134695.ZfL8zNpBrT@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AS8PR08MB708092D2C5F57731A275CCA59E549@AS8PR08MB7080.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>

14/01/2022 10:05, Ruifeng Wang:
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > 17/12/2021 09:54, Ruifeng Wang:
> > > As per design document, RTE_ARCH is the name of the architecture.
> > > However, the definition was missing on Arm with meson build.
> > > It impacts applications that refers to this string.
> > >
> > > Added for Arm builds.
> > >
> > > Fixes: b1d48c41189a ("build: support ARM with meson")
> > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> > > ---
> > >                  ['RTE_ARCH_ARMv8_AARCH32', true],
> > > +                ['RTE_ARCH', 'arm64_aarch32'],
> > 
> > Why not armv8_aarch32?
> 
> Thanks for the comments.
> Agreed. armv8_aarch32 is consistent with the RTE_ARCH_xx macro above.
> 
> > 
> > [...]
> > >          dpdk_conf.set('RTE_ARCH_ARMv7', true)
> > > +        dpdk_conf.set('RTE_ARCH', 'armv7')
> > [...]
> > >      # armv8 build
> > > +    dpdk_conf.set('RTE_ARCH', 'arm64')
> > 
> > Why not armv8?
> > 
> > What I prefer the most in silicon industry is the naming craziness :)
> 
> While armv8 usually refers to one generation of the Arm architecture, arm64 is more generic for 64-bit architectures.
> And what defined for armv8 build is RTE_ARCH_ARM64. So for consistency, arm64 is better?

I don't really care as long as we can have fun of this naming :)



  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-14 12:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-17  8:54 Ruifeng Wang
2022-01-13 17:32 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-01-14  9:05   ` Ruifeng Wang
2022-01-14 12:50     ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2022-01-17 13:12     ` Juraj Linkeš
2022-01-17 13:50       ` Morten Brørup
2022-01-19  9:44       ` Ruifeng Wang
2022-01-17  7:15 ` [PATCH v2] " Ruifeng Wang
2022-01-19  9:01   ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-01-19  9:51     ` Ruifeng Wang
2022-01-20  2:38 ` [PATCH v3] " Ruifeng Wang
2022-01-20 14:09   ` Thomas Monjalon

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=2134695.ZfL8zNpBrT@thomas \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=stable@dpdk.org \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=viktorin@rehivetech.com \
    /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).