From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18125A04B5; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 10:30:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56CE11BF73; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 10:30:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com (new1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.221]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85E71F28 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 10:30:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4624A77A6; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 04:30:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 02 Dec 2019 04:30:13 -0500 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=mesmtp; bh=PPDacV+FpWKivFMRqmqJvSEH6yxgOH/GOr13EI05VYM=; b=Qyk5C2CxobYo gaSgp9Q2XzTwV4A0p3I2okqVfVQoZC9RRQtrRcLdtBXdUbOpxVIodXP90FeYWQv/ QortX4kaNljqvgPHboj12+JmlGLUK3vTJA1S9frxPJLe+kgOZ2hvVu8dmWr0WHE4 yMtGJicoDR70JgfthIQ1i6KRA5dDn3A= 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=fm1; bh=PPDacV+FpWKivFMRqmqJvSEH6yxgOH/GOr13EI05V YM=; b=xA3VNW51ijCHvYoHvLwWJXdkCpRezJ7UGXVooieeY6nZ5FxKINNcU1nFA cJCB6uyUZmrWeYfSWgN0BVNThDyohC42Tfr2ROJI9RdIm+2fvE5/6zxtU9Y6ZWe9 4ftoxXBgL8uKrdZrkSVsn53WSOVo+TcM9eEGbvFY4q5uXTSyZHM1+1jQAnYnALsi GEu//m/n3VViWIvlba2OfXUW3L70KRrRwKoCaqtYMU2pq8FOP0YUMzp+RetNN+II TXYVkSClcWaC30FstLLbGIqDM4yJUwE96BR7zEiIYqtU4MJwu4ehp3d4diPetRwT 8BCSBjFoHpftb7sGYUl3sEmMSiZsw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrudejhedgtdeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtqhertddttddunecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt 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 795E98005C; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 04:30:10 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= Cc: "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" , "Joyce Kong (Arm Technology China)" , dev@dpdk.org, jerinj@marvell.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, Bruce Richardson , nd , david.marchand@redhat.com, Honnappa Nagarahalli , ravi1.kumar@amd.com, rmody@marvell.com, shshaikh@marvell.com, xuanziyang2@huawei.com, cloud.wangxiaoyun@huawei.com, zhouguoyang@huawei.com Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 10:30:09 +0100 Message-ID: <2754775.WDKU3ik09V@xps> In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60C3D@smartserver.smartshare.dk> References: <1571125801-45773-1-git-send-email-joyce.kong@arm.com> <3338244.xi9Rne9xir@xps> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60C3D@smartserver.smartshare.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/6] net/axgbe: use common rte bitoperation APIs instead X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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" Archived-At: List-Archive: 02/12/2019 10:24, Morten Br=F8rup: > Thomas, >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon > > Sent: Monday, December 2, 2019 10:12 AM > >=20 > > 02/12/2019 07:09, Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China): > > > Hi Bruce, Thomas, > > > > > > This series of patches was reported a compilation issue[1] on 32bit > > Ubuntu. > > > On mainstream 64-bit OS, "unsigned long" is 64-bit in size and we > > uses the 64-bit variant of APIs. But the 32-bit OS expect 32-bit > > 'unsigned long' arguments. > > > This is where the error happens. > >=20 > > Please could you be more specific? What is the exact error? >=20 > The PMD has a private structure with an unsigned long field. >=20 > The patch for the PMD uses the 64 bit operations on this field. The patch= fails to compile for a 32 bit target, because the struct field is only 32 = bit there. >=20 > >=20 > > > My question is how 32-bit OSes shall we support, put another way, can > > we ignore this compilation issue? > > > If we still need to care, how about making 'obsolete' of 'unsigned > > long' and use 'uint32' instead to be multi-OS friendly? > >=20 > > Which unsigned long? > > If it is in the (not merged) bit API, it can still be changed no? > >=20 >=20 > The patch for the PMD can be changed to use the 64 or 32 bit operations d= epending on whether it is being compiled for a 64 or 32 bit target. >=20 > However, the question seems to be if we want to either 1) do something li= ke that, or 2) drop support for 32 bit targets, or 3) make these target dep= endent fields obsolete (i.e. ban the use of unsigned long) and require expl= icit sizes, e.g. uint32_t. We should support both, and use the appropriate instruction. But I wonder why this field has not a fixed size. It would be probably better to change the field to uint32_t or uint64_t.