From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <marcinx.smoczynski@intel.com> Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD89E4CC3 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:58:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 May 2019 01:58:46 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.205]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 May 2019 01:58:46 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx114.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.8) by fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 14 May 2019 01:58:46 -0700 Received: from lcsmsx155.ger.corp.intel.com (10.186.165.233) by FMSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 14 May 2019 01:58:45 -0700 Received: from HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.92]) by LCSMSX155.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.12.172]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Tue, 14 May 2019 11:58:43 +0300 From: "Smoczynski, MarcinX" <marcinx.smoczynski@intel.com> To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> CC: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "shahafs@mellanox.com" <shahafs@mellanox.com>, "gaetan.rivet@6wind.com" <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>, "matan@mellanox.com" <matan@mellanox.com> Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Using _XOPEN_SOURCE macros may break builds on FreeBSD Thread-Index: AdUHUhFuf1vcUQd1TgeecdbKRnBo9f//4sQAgAAB2gD/+6jjcIAIiFoAgAAGqQCAACi1AIAANQaA//67E1A= Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 08:58:42 +0000 Message-ID: <2F25558C1648FA498380EAC12A86126251FDD5@HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <2F25558C1648FA498380EAC12A8612624FD953@HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com> <9076832.UKkv39EgZr@xps> <2604468.nBFxeWxGDx@xps> <2F25558C1648FA498380EAC12A86126251F3B2@HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com> <20190513102510.GJ4284@6wind.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772580161631159@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20190513131442.GK4284@6wind.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801616313F3@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801616313F3@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.600.7 dlp-reaction: no-action x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiY2YwMDRlZjUtZTk2Ny00NDZmLWEzY2QtMmMyMzBjOTMyZWE5IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiTXpvbUZjYSs2RWI2dFZHbmF6eHR6d1lIVkRwZmJVM0hoTnlNQmViVnN0QVBaTTNVRlk1MFpcL3kyZlVXWmZpNmwifQ== x-originating-ip: [10.104.12.183] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Using _XOPEN_SOURCE macros may break builds on FreeBSD X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 08:58:48 -0000 > > Hey Konstantin, > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:49:00AM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > Hi Adrien, > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 09:51:24AM +0000, Smoczynski, MarcinX > wrote: > > > > > 10/05/2019 20:17, Thomas Monjalon: > > > > > > 10/05/2019 19:14, Smoczynski, MarcinX: > > > > > > > To summarize we have different visibility sets for Linux and > > > > > > > BSD when using XOPEN_SOURCE or POSIX_C_SOURCE explicitly. > To > > > > > > > overcome this situation we can either remove problematic > > > > > > > XOPEN macros from mk/meson rules (drivers/net/failsafe, > > > > > > > drivers/net/mlx4, > > > > > > > drivers/net/mlx5) > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the consequence of removing these macros in mlx and > failsafe PMDs? > > > > > > > > > > The purpose of these *_SOURCE constants is to enable particular > > > > > feature sets visibility. As long as we have GNU_SOURCE on Linux > > > > > removing it won't have any consequences. On BSD it will unify > > > > > feature sets visibility with the rest of sources. Can't think of = any > downsides here. > > > > > > > > > > I believe XOPEN_SOURCE was introduced to extend features not to > restrict them. > > > > > > > > I confirm that under Linux, all IPPROTO_* (POSIX/XOPEN/RFC1700) > > > > are defined regardless (_GNU_SOURCE not even needed), while under > > > > FreeBSD, the non-POSIX versions are only defined when > __BSD_VISIBLE is set. > > > > > > > > The FreeBSD behavior is more correct in this respect since the > > > > purpose of _XOPEN_SOURCE and friends is also to let applications > > > > limit the risk of redefinitions in case they were written for an > > > > earlier standard (e.g. -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D500 vs. - > D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D600). > > > > > > Still not sure why do you need it for failsafe and mlx PMDs? > > > Would something in these PMDs be broken without '- > D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D600'? > > > > Well, not really. At least not anymore if they compile fine without it > > on all supported targets. I don't mind if they are removed from PMDs. > > > > _XOPEN_SOURCE=3D600 was originally added to mlx4 (later inherited by > > mlx5 and > > failsafe) for the following reasons: > > > > - Out fo habit, since a lot of stuff in unistd.h and fcntl.h depends on= it > > to be exposed. Some affected definitions were likely needed at some > point. > > > > - Besides toggling C syntax extensions, forcing a C standard through th= e > > -std parameter (e.g. -std=3Dc99) in order to guarantee a minimum leve= l of > > C compliance disables the implicit presence of nonstandard definition= s, > > which must be re-enabled as needed through the appropriate #defines. > > > > For instance, including unistd.h for getsid() stops working as soon as > > you use -std=3Dc99. On Linux you can get it back through -std=3Dgnu99 o= r > > by combining -std=3Dc99 with -D_GNU_SOURCE or -D_XOPEN_SOURCE. The > > latter was chosen because it is the standard define supposed to work > across OSes. > > > > Historically mlx4 had to enable -std=3Dc99 to be able to use various > > features not present when GCC defaulted to -std=3Dgnu90. It was later > > transformed to > > -std=3Dc11 for similar reasons (anonymous members in structs/unions if > > memory serves me right). > > > > > > DPDK applications may also define _XOPEN_SOURCE for their own > > > > needs. They should still be able to use rte_ip.h afterward. > > > > > > I suppose they can, they would just have (on FreeBSD) to add '-D > __BSD_VISIBLE' > > > themselves. > > > > Of course, but public headers should be as self sufficient as possible. > > Unless they provide really insane compiler flags, if user applications > > get compilation errors after including some header we install on the > > system, I think the blame is on DPDK. > > > > > > I think this reason is > > > > enough to go with -D__BSD_VISIBLE under FreeBSD without removing > > > > _XOPEN_SOURCE, as it should work regardless. > > > > > > So do you suggest to add '-D __BSD_VISIBLE' into mlx/failsafe PMDs > > > Makefiles/meson.build, or ... ? > > > > Since headers of our public API potentially require it, it must be > > defined globally (unlike _XOPEN_SOURCE which is only local to a few > PMDs): > > app/meson.build, lib/meson.build, mk/target/generic/rte.vars.mk, > > alongside -D_GNU_SOURCE. > > > > Add it to mlx*/failsafe only if that's not enough. Just make sure > > applications inherit this flag. > > Ok, to summarize, eyour suggestion is: > 1. remove -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D... from mlx and failsafe PMDs. > 2. add '-D __BSD_VISIBLE' into top level make/meson files > (app/meson.build, lib/meson.build, mk/target/generic/rte.vars.mk) Similar > to what we doing for -DGNU_SOURCE. > > If I understand you correctly, then it sounds ok to me. > > > > > > > Looking at the patch [1], I also think there's another, simpler app= roach: > > > > unless really performance critical, defining > > > > rte_ipv6_get_next_ext() in rte_net.c instead of a static inline in > rte_ip.h should address this issue. > > > > > > It is performance critical, and I think that function call for each > > > ext header is a way too expensive approach. > > > Will prefer to keep that function inline. > > > > OK, a bit cumbersome but since we're heading this way [2], how about > > defining our own instead of all the above? > > > > #define RTE_IPPROTO_HOPOPTS 0 > > #define RTE_IPPROTO_ROUTING 43 > > ... > > > > Which could prove handy later as it appears Linux and FreeBSD don't > > have the same set of available IPPROTO_* definitions. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > [2] "[RFC v2 00/14] prefix network structures" > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-April/129752.html > > Yep, that's definitely an option too. > But if we going to replace all current references of IPPROTO_ inside DPDK= to > RTE_IPROTO_ - the change will be massive. > And for sure it is out of scope of this patch series. > That's probably need to be done after Olivier RFC will be in and should b= e > subject of a separate patch series. > Konstantin I agree that we need RTE_IPPROTO* macros but as Konstantin pointed out this would be a huge change and we should do that on top of Oliver's work in a separate patch set. I will propose a patch set with: 1. Removed XOPEN_SOURCE macros as they are not needed anymore 2. Added BSD_VISIBLE at the top of build system. Thanks for your comments, Marcin. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id E110AA00E6 for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:58:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 026125688; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:58:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD89E4CC3 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:58:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 May 2019 01:58:46 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.205]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 May 2019 01:58:46 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx114.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.8) by fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 14 May 2019 01:58:46 -0700 Received: from lcsmsx155.ger.corp.intel.com (10.186.165.233) by FMSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 14 May 2019 01:58:45 -0700 Received: from HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.92]) by LCSMSX155.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.12.172]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Tue, 14 May 2019 11:58:43 +0300 From: "Smoczynski, MarcinX" <marcinx.smoczynski@intel.com> To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> CC: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "shahafs@mellanox.com" <shahafs@mellanox.com>, "gaetan.rivet@6wind.com" <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>, "matan@mellanox.com" <matan@mellanox.com> Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Using _XOPEN_SOURCE macros may break builds on FreeBSD Thread-Index: AdUHUhFuf1vcUQd1TgeecdbKRnBo9f//4sQAgAAB2gD/+6jjcIAIiFoAgAAGqQCAACi1AIAANQaA//67E1A= Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 08:58:42 +0000 Message-ID: <2F25558C1648FA498380EAC12A86126251FDD5@HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <2F25558C1648FA498380EAC12A8612624FD953@HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com> <9076832.UKkv39EgZr@xps> <2604468.nBFxeWxGDx@xps> <2F25558C1648FA498380EAC12A86126251F3B2@HASMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com> <20190513102510.GJ4284@6wind.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772580161631159@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20190513131442.GK4284@6wind.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801616313F3@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801616313F3@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.600.7 dlp-reaction: no-action x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiY2YwMDRlZjUtZTk2Ny00NDZmLWEzY2QtMmMyMzBjOTMyZWE5IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiTXpvbUZjYSs2RWI2dFZHbmF6eHR6d1lIVkRwZmJVM0hoTnlNQmViVnN0QVBaTTNVRlk1MFpcL3kyZlVXWmZpNmwifQ== x-originating-ip: [10.104.12.183] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Using _XOPEN_SOURCE macros may break builds on FreeBSD X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Message-ID: <20190514085842.Em2EwVFKJtbrmnmGUdiwvqu4DhVPyGES3WV8yV7v9uY@z> > > Hey Konstantin, > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:49:00AM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > Hi Adrien, > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 09:51:24AM +0000, Smoczynski, MarcinX > wrote: > > > > > 10/05/2019 20:17, Thomas Monjalon: > > > > > > 10/05/2019 19:14, Smoczynski, MarcinX: > > > > > > > To summarize we have different visibility sets for Linux and > > > > > > > BSD when using XOPEN_SOURCE or POSIX_C_SOURCE explicitly. > To > > > > > > > overcome this situation we can either remove problematic > > > > > > > XOPEN macros from mk/meson rules (drivers/net/failsafe, > > > > > > > drivers/net/mlx4, > > > > > > > drivers/net/mlx5) > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the consequence of removing these macros in mlx and > failsafe PMDs? > > > > > > > > > > The purpose of these *_SOURCE constants is to enable particular > > > > > feature sets visibility. As long as we have GNU_SOURCE on Linux > > > > > removing it won't have any consequences. On BSD it will unify > > > > > feature sets visibility with the rest of sources. Can't think of = any > downsides here. > > > > > > > > > > I believe XOPEN_SOURCE was introduced to extend features not to > restrict them. > > > > > > > > I confirm that under Linux, all IPPROTO_* (POSIX/XOPEN/RFC1700) > > > > are defined regardless (_GNU_SOURCE not even needed), while under > > > > FreeBSD, the non-POSIX versions are only defined when > __BSD_VISIBLE is set. > > > > > > > > The FreeBSD behavior is more correct in this respect since the > > > > purpose of _XOPEN_SOURCE and friends is also to let applications > > > > limit the risk of redefinitions in case they were written for an > > > > earlier standard (e.g. -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D500 vs. - > D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D600). > > > > > > Still not sure why do you need it for failsafe and mlx PMDs? > > > Would something in these PMDs be broken without '- > D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D600'? > > > > Well, not really. At least not anymore if they compile fine without it > > on all supported targets. I don't mind if they are removed from PMDs. > > > > _XOPEN_SOURCE=3D600 was originally added to mlx4 (later inherited by > > mlx5 and > > failsafe) for the following reasons: > > > > - Out fo habit, since a lot of stuff in unistd.h and fcntl.h depends on= it > > to be exposed. Some affected definitions were likely needed at some > point. > > > > - Besides toggling C syntax extensions, forcing a C standard through th= e > > -std parameter (e.g. -std=3Dc99) in order to guarantee a minimum leve= l of > > C compliance disables the implicit presence of nonstandard definition= s, > > which must be re-enabled as needed through the appropriate #defines. > > > > For instance, including unistd.h for getsid() stops working as soon as > > you use -std=3Dc99. On Linux you can get it back through -std=3Dgnu99 o= r > > by combining -std=3Dc99 with -D_GNU_SOURCE or -D_XOPEN_SOURCE. The > > latter was chosen because it is the standard define supposed to work > across OSes. > > > > Historically mlx4 had to enable -std=3Dc99 to be able to use various > > features not present when GCC defaulted to -std=3Dgnu90. It was later > > transformed to > > -std=3Dc11 for similar reasons (anonymous members in structs/unions if > > memory serves me right). > > > > > > DPDK applications may also define _XOPEN_SOURCE for their own > > > > needs. They should still be able to use rte_ip.h afterward. > > > > > > I suppose they can, they would just have (on FreeBSD) to add '-D > __BSD_VISIBLE' > > > themselves. > > > > Of course, but public headers should be as self sufficient as possible. > > Unless they provide really insane compiler flags, if user applications > > get compilation errors after including some header we install on the > > system, I think the blame is on DPDK. > > > > > > I think this reason is > > > > enough to go with -D__BSD_VISIBLE under FreeBSD without removing > > > > _XOPEN_SOURCE, as it should work regardless. > > > > > > So do you suggest to add '-D __BSD_VISIBLE' into mlx/failsafe PMDs > > > Makefiles/meson.build, or ... ? > > > > Since headers of our public API potentially require it, it must be > > defined globally (unlike _XOPEN_SOURCE which is only local to a few > PMDs): > > app/meson.build, lib/meson.build, mk/target/generic/rte.vars.mk, > > alongside -D_GNU_SOURCE. > > > > Add it to mlx*/failsafe only if that's not enough. Just make sure > > applications inherit this flag. > > Ok, to summarize, eyour suggestion is: > 1. remove -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=3D... from mlx and failsafe PMDs. > 2. add '-D __BSD_VISIBLE' into top level make/meson files > (app/meson.build, lib/meson.build, mk/target/generic/rte.vars.mk) Similar > to what we doing for -DGNU_SOURCE. > > If I understand you correctly, then it sounds ok to me. > > > > > > > Looking at the patch [1], I also think there's another, simpler app= roach: > > > > unless really performance critical, defining > > > > rte_ipv6_get_next_ext() in rte_net.c instead of a static inline in > rte_ip.h should address this issue. > > > > > > It is performance critical, and I think that function call for each > > > ext header is a way too expensive approach. > > > Will prefer to keep that function inline. > > > > OK, a bit cumbersome but since we're heading this way [2], how about > > defining our own instead of all the above? > > > > #define RTE_IPPROTO_HOPOPTS 0 > > #define RTE_IPPROTO_ROUTING 43 > > ... > > > > Which could prove handy later as it appears Linux and FreeBSD don't > > have the same set of available IPPROTO_* definitions. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > [2] "[RFC v2 00/14] prefix network structures" > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-April/129752.html > > Yep, that's definitely an option too. > But if we going to replace all current references of IPPROTO_ inside DPDK= to > RTE_IPROTO_ - the change will be massive. > And for sure it is out of scope of this patch series. > That's probably need to be done after Olivier RFC will be in and should b= e > subject of a separate patch series. > Konstantin I agree that we need RTE_IPPROTO* macros but as Konstantin pointed out this would be a huge change and we should do that on top of Oliver's work in a separate patch set. I will propose a patch set with: 1. Removed XOPEN_SOURCE macros as they are not needed anymore 2. Added BSD_VISIBLE at the top of build system. Thanks for your comments, Marcin.