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 A9EBAA0C42; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 00:41:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74F694068E; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 00:41:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CBDE4014D for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 00:41:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008CF4E5; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 18:41:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 08 Apr 2021 18:41:39 -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=fm3; bh= Jya49crJaweZcxJNHAUyfWjqOd/kB0AaICWxYoHIhZQ=; b=obmavX8LvyHiVR9L 9wtFyKIC1ALXXqnoiLTc75fGr/u6VE84lROK3S/7vVhpLGJvsgA6Ec3Vq/8w8PRD CizXh4qAvwajethchg5a0sGox6pU3eEch+zM4HxS5v9AUD/uKYpj22uv44CO0pDF CcNpAikDj7yLxFZNEchbWFBHNtDGybx5UTdbXHOV+Ip0uOHXsIzC2KzqN/n7r0OV 3UtOsogkb1BAWxN9I/AjiTwXLm0lp774lo3bHvojoO24zBZUpiuV4z85H+/gwzGg BHCeg06+oZtC5ME/P/Q2tksX+JkjrJRt+gyF+kcaYS4iqtwZQNmuPI7kHfmwZ0al 8AtuIw== 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=fm2; bh=Jya49crJaweZcxJNHAUyfWjqOd/kB0AaICWxYoHIh ZQ=; b=tIb2dQ0+4VyC4VmWSsiujDdOdYOnPjL9VGbl/JddzBZToRP4TK5hFe0Ha X0VrTpsESYoTBqbQvw3zwpXNqP/acSOLzk0tVTEkMM+biDfXEmvPXofSIlid59NV +t8za/ytesjd4xe4opOfAlTCvvup9PlR6F+PaObZYDWvc85KsTzvNN0O0Z9s15S3 YWibB06tDpx4RzlfaGW3U5+8FE6/tuFSqz/3lnlcbOTvuZWBuq2vq2EvFOqZZRKU K7PKjzzlGOvov/bezPK4hV/m+AqMhBXT02JzCnv94Et/Aog/ERPjt24nf1UzMoe6 hBnPmzpo6q8xjqLAoW7e+qnVlE1xw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudektddgudduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7C1411080054; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 18:41:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Amber, Kumar" Cc: "Wang, Yipeng1" , dev@dpdk.org, "Richardson, Bruce" , "Gobriel, Sameh" Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 00:41:34 +0200 Message-ID: <23449419.HG3X9kRrra@thomas> In-Reply-To: <9326090.qLjmXhQq0I@thomas> References: <20210112072446.880122-1-kumar.amber@intel.com> <9326090.qLjmXhQq0I@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] lib/hash: support non sse42 cpu architecture 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" 25/03/2021 09:06, Thomas Monjalon: > 24/03/2021 23:59, Wang, Yipeng1: > > From: kumar amber > > > > > > add _SSE42_ flag to enable compilation of > > > sse42 specific instructions only on supported architecture > > > > > > Signed-off-by: kumar amber [...] > > [Wang, Yipeng] > > Hi, Kumar, thanks for the patch. > > I think the minimum required machine for x86 is sse4.2 compatible already. So I wonder if we really need this. > > Yes, that's why I don't understand this patch. Any comment? Should we reject the patch?