From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D7BA0A0C; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 13:34:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B99F34014D; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 13:34:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C79E140143 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 13:34:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413905C011B; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 07:34:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:34:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= IwU9xwFH9e0iXqTAk50ZhP/P7PBvGzGxKFLAUtokMi8=; b=Zr7dDTiwaOHhBEx7 aAfuOHiBoy1iSjdztfzIX0dysjXGQKsKXygDY/MyFu0JsF7gbvnRJvV6ED5SiHob BOwY3yf41iVr25oWlnsNcSeCpQhbiTHwNoJVczx9t6yIzznARHnxdFhvh1syzHwb Y/SLZqgCYG7MuMhMJmm6yHRk2ByygL/KJwOpikm9zh4stxRZtDDYBhXHGAvmTYU2 jt1XhQbaBz0wBc2xn3H/8MCWtIxH1vJCZPWCdjmyjuAriqwOs76VN+iz5wuKFo8u kRvEiBpJwKJEVIetsncyXDAHCVw6f+7XIUfphuwhX85Bc2LWDidI8VQx7prg7/ck ah6VgA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=IwU9xwFH9e0iXqTAk50ZhP/P7PBvGzGxKFLAUtokM i8=; b=Q5nSp2NhcqimzuHix8npGcsVA9wTGAEBvzE3I8CW/s+e25JUBnLd49b2U ATOzDq2KrJ/6C1FPEUnphO9n2jQVqdYvc/ddg5O8OdRbeBDiuqiS6lS9WheCb/KF 53r5WjxtumWSa7tIsYg6cPcHBhpqgC+MTSmvTJ/rXxmimqrzTrL6umMIIgZk1OJI vJJ9ErGGRuxaKnKj5xywtzYcjmTKlQ26hhnsoDKLlB5zX6l7BPeTR+THzAco7Z6w izY6myk9ZJM9vWknmBb1K1kVzoMq43Fs/srN3a0LyUsC4FYGuKGb7QOpE3h4GuUk aOuyl5vb+rPKSSf+1BUIb0nElh9cw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrtdeigdegtdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertd dttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehm ohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeegle fghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeuieeivdffgeehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgep tdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnh gvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 07:34:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Tyler Retzlaff Cc: dev@dpdk.org, dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 13:34:06 +0200 Message-ID: <2327932.72rn2HgcyV@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20210709001656.GA23346@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <20210708192109.GA13966@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <1925991.Mh3L70K1Gt@thomas> <20210709001656.GA23346@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] RFC enabling dll/dso for dpdk on windows X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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" 09/07/2021 02:16, Tyler Retzlaff: > On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 10:39:13PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 08/07/2021 21:21, Tyler Retzlaff: > > > (2) importing exported data symbols from a dll/dso on windows requires > > > that the symbol be decorated with dllimport. optionally loading > > > performance of dll/dso is also further improved by decorating > > > exported function symbols. [3] > > > > > > for (2) we would propose the introduction and use of two macros to > > > allow decoration of exported data symbols. these macro would be or > > > similarly named __rte_import and __rte_export. of note > > > > That's the same symbol declared in a single place > > which is exported and imported. > > So I don't understand the need for 2 macros. > > i may be misinterpreting your reply. you're saying there is no need for > 2 because we use .def files? > > strictly speaking when exporting C symbols this is true. so yes, we > could introduce only __rte_import and not bother with __rte_export. > > is that what you meant? > > i don't have any objection to just __rte_import alone but it is > mandatory for data symbols. It may be my misunderstanding. The function is declared only once in the .h so I don't understand where these 2 macros are used.