* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build
@ 2016-02-12 17:05 Fernando Seiti Furusato
2016-02-12 17:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Fernando Seiti Furusato @ 2016-02-12 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev
Add a proper ifeq statement to set the mcpu as needed for ppc64el, as
the only one originally set is not valid for ppc architectures.
Signed-off-by: Fernando Seiti Furusato <ferseiti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
mk/machine/default/rte.vars.mk | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mk/machine/default/rte.vars.mk b/mk/machine/default/rte.vars.mk
index 53c6af6..77b4065 100644
--- a/mk/machine/default/rte.vars.mk
+++ b/mk/machine/default/rte.vars.mk
@@ -55,4 +55,8 @@
# CPU_LDFLAGS =
# CPU_ASFLAGS =
-MACHINE_CFLAGS += -march=core2
+ifeq (ppc64le,$(shell uname -m))
+ MACHINE_CFLAGS += -mcpu=power8
+else
+ MACHINE_CFLAGS += -march=core2
+endif
--
2.7.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build
2016-02-12 17:05 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build Fernando Seiti Furusato
@ 2016-02-12 17:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-12 19:18 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-02-12 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fernando Seiti Furusato; +Cc: dev
2016-02-12 12:05, Fernando Seiti Furusato:
> Add a proper ifeq statement to set the mcpu as needed for ppc64el, as
> the only one originally set is not valid for ppc architectures.
What is the benefit of using the default machine config, compared to
the power8 one?
Don't you think the default machine should be renamed core2?
[...]
> +ifeq (ppc64le,$(shell uname -m))
> + MACHINE_CFLAGS += -mcpu=power8
Why this flag is not set in mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build
2016-02-12 17:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
@ 2016-02-12 19:18 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
2016-02-16 18:04 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Fernando Seiti Furusato @ 2016-02-12 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: dev
Hello Thomas.
Thanks for your quick response.
On 02/12/2016 03:37 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-02-12 12:05, Fernando Seiti Furusato:
>> Add a proper ifeq statement to set the mcpu as needed for ppc64el, as
>> the only one originally set is not valid for ppc architectures.
>
> What is the benefit of using the default machine config, compared to
> the power8 one?
>
> Don't you think the default machine should be renamed core2?
I think it would be better indeed. Thanks for pointing that out.
>
> [...]
>> +ifeq (ppc64le,$(shell uname -m))
>> + MACHINE_CFLAGS += -mcpu=power8
>
> Why this flag is not set in mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk ?
>
This and what observed above would make a better patch.
Let me try those.
Thanks!
--
Fernando Seiti Furusato
IBM Linux Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build
2016-02-12 19:18 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
@ 2016-02-16 18:04 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
2016-02-16 18:09 ` Thomas Monjalon
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Fernando Seiti Furusato @ 2016-02-16 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: dev
Hi Thomas.
On 02/12/2016 05:18 PM, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote:
> Hello Thomas.
> Thanks for your quick response.
>
> On 02/12/2016 03:37 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>> 2016-02-12 12:05, Fernando Seiti Furusato:
>>> Add a proper ifeq statement to set the mcpu as needed for ppc64el, as
>>> the only one originally set is not valid for ppc architectures.
>>
>> What is the benefit of using the default machine config, compared to
>> the power8 one?
>>
>> Don't you think the default machine should be renamed core2?
>
> I think it would be better indeed. Thanks for pointing that out.
>
>>
>> [...]
>>> +ifeq (ppc64le,$(shell uname -m))
>>> + MACHINE_CFLAGS += -mcpu=power8
>>
>> Why this flag is not set in mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk ?
>>
>
> This and what observed above would make a better patch.
> Let me try those.
I will be just changing the flag within mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk so
it will be used on ppc64le.
I thought since I am not sure how it will affect others, I will not mess
with the default file.
I had to copy config/defconfig_ppc_64-power8-linuxapp-gcc to
config/defconfig_ppc64le-native-linuxapp-gcc, because the build searches
for it on ppc64le. Should I include that in the patch?
Do you think there is a better approach?
Thanks and regards.
--
Fernando Seiti Furusato
IBM Linux Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build
2016-02-16 18:04 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
@ 2016-02-16 18:09 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-16 19:07 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2016-02-16 18:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fernando Seiti Furusato; +Cc: dev
2016-02-16 16:04, Fernando Seiti Furusato:
> Hi Thomas.
>
> On 02/12/2016 05:18 PM, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote:
> > Hello Thomas.
> > Thanks for your quick response.
> >
> > On 02/12/2016 03:37 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >> 2016-02-12 12:05, Fernando Seiti Furusato:
> >>> Add a proper ifeq statement to set the mcpu as needed for ppc64el, as
> >>> the only one originally set is not valid for ppc architectures.
> >>
> >> What is the benefit of using the default machine config, compared to
> >> the power8 one?
> >>
> >> Don't you think the default machine should be renamed core2?
> >
> > I think it would be better indeed. Thanks for pointing that out.
> >
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>> +ifeq (ppc64le,$(shell uname -m))
> >>> + MACHINE_CFLAGS += -mcpu=power8
> >>
> >> Why this flag is not set in mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk ?
> >>
> >
> > This and what observed above would make a better patch.
> > Let me try those.
>
> I will be just changing the flag within mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk so
> it will be used on ppc64le.
Does it mean that only little endian is supported on POWER8?
> I thought since I am not sure how it will affect others, I will not mess
> with the default file.
Yes let's keep it for another patch if someone is concerned.
> I had to copy config/defconfig_ppc_64-power8-linuxapp-gcc to
> config/defconfig_ppc64le-native-linuxapp-gcc, because the build searches
> for it on ppc64le. Should I include that in the patch?
> Do you think there is a better approach?
Not sure to understand.
I think there is something wrong in the commands you use to compile.
Are you using "make config T=ppc_64-power8-linuxapp-gcc" ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build
2016-02-16 18:09 ` Thomas Monjalon
@ 2016-02-16 19:07 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Fernando Seiti Furusato @ 2016-02-16 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: dev
On 02/16/2016 04:09 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-02-16 16:04, Fernando Seiti Furusato:
>> Hi Thomas.
>>
>> On 02/12/2016 05:18 PM, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote:
>>> Hello Thomas.
>>> Thanks for your quick response.
>>>
>>> On 02/12/2016 03:37 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>>> 2016-02-12 12:05, Fernando Seiti Furusato:
>>>>> Add a proper ifeq statement to set the mcpu as needed for ppc64el, as
>>>>> the only one originally set is not valid for ppc architectures.
>>>>
>>>> What is the benefit of using the default machine config, compared to
>>>> the power8 one?
>>>>
>>>> Don't you think the default machine should be renamed core2?
>>>
>>> I think it would be better indeed. Thanks for pointing that out.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>> +ifeq (ppc64le,$(shell uname -m))
>>>>> + MACHINE_CFLAGS += -mcpu=power8
>>>>
>>>> Why this flag is not set in mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> This and what observed above would make a better patch.
>>> Let me try those.
>>
>> I will be just changing the flag within mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk so
>> it will be used on ppc64le.
>
> Does it mean that only little endian is supported on POWER8?
Not exactly. It is just that I work mainly on LE.
It would probably work on big endian too.
>
>> I thought since I am not sure how it will affect others, I will not mess
>> with the default file.
>
> Yes let's keep it for another patch if someone is concerned.
>
>> I had to copy config/defconfig_ppc_64-power8-linuxapp-gcc to
>> config/defconfig_ppc64le-native-linuxapp-gcc, because the build searches
>> for it on ppc64le. Should I include that in the patch?
>> Do you think there is a better approach?
>
> Not sure to understand.
> I think there is something wrong in the commands you use to compile.
> Are you using "make config T=ppc_64-power8-linuxapp-gcc" ?
>
Nah, never mind about this one. You are right, I messed it up.
I copied the line from what was generated by debian/rules on the ubuntu package.
Thanks.
--
Fernando Seiti Furusato
IBM Linux Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-02-16 19:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-02-12 17:05 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] build: set CFLAGS for ppc64el build Fernando Seiti Furusato
2016-02-12 17:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-12 19:18 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
2016-02-16 18:04 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
2016-02-16 18:09 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-16 19:07 ` Fernando Seiti Furusato
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).