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 54E70A04E6; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:12:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914E8E07; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:12:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C220BCF3 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:12:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D94EE41; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 13:12:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 07 Dec 2020 13:12:35 -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=fm2; bh= i/aOvZgF4zvaIftJhyzzi8cbI9UK+yuVfq6FXCKSqFg=; b=c8LUpCviIvjMPbM7 IQLOjaMa9O9+SPG2H0RfVSFI2zNbup50GHVM8uI6eX2og86mhuQb6tYVyWS5wpH1 mo8HnCKRRQLolUdMM3UPtbt1z+Vc0b4pTDEgi2WwqsX51Ptmhwmkt9LQYGlLmTxO sG03PdQyWctnLkr9JGpnTooGTOselXl+Agzb03ciZYNfavEGu+DEUNwZbzosM3ly +ealHkd5xR/zNxycBxmZzt4J/rCpCtIwdnLvrcqsKKhZzmvv/VmYOyVserpKBFM3 fmEW67hfZti7Mfn2yt0NRRv/ZdhoQAmzSR4BaO6HkxyK3adPFaYe28Xo/tNnSMKW aGpYWw== 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=i/aOvZgF4zvaIftJhyzzi8cbI9UK+yuVfq6FXCKSq Fg=; b=NTcGqfk/ULZHVIzS7XgxbJQlsm3CgzJMPrxq85Xs3fmgucGAPh0Nvo80V QgGabfqFRHs2NffsD1bRUDSxtOnRBCqBHjmsFrt7pYPi6DkD242ZuAKX5NbDOyQ1 5QcudNP1ySPDioJDST/aoi5J9sreXRHAf22+pjzvgbpoXLL5tNyGZrRh3Zs+9gjX cBa2W6rgQ+qU3qqc4YXXXWUlTNj4QKrFVT/YHENo+jzI3haqbQyaFXR1uKPh0Mnq Kh+cLNlsYXvXZZQ0BlXONNsRjmPxf5Xea2wdOcufvth14+xxWcUNY1O5am8JXHjw sS6+Tjpquv/ggtLipCXzWhwkFRBzw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudejgedguddtlecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej ueeiiedvffegheenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrh fuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgr lhhonhdrnhgvth 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 0DAD324005C; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 13:12:33 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 19:12:32 +0100 Message-ID: <4516256.vyG4RrSlNk@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20201207174754.GA24@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20201207173319.1397740-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <20201207174754.GA24@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] devtools: avoid installing static binaries 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" 07/12/2020 18:47, Bruce Richardson: > On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 06:33:19PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > When testing compilation and checking ABI compatibility, > > there is no real need of static binaries eating disks. > > The static linkage of applications are tested with GCC and Clang, > > plus some examples are statically linked. > > The after-installation build test is limited to "helloworld" example. > > Note the meson static build test was already limited to "l3fwd" example. > > > > The ABI compatibility is checked on shared libraries, so no need > > running this test a second time on builds intended for static linking. > > However, limiting ABI check to "shared builds" means all test cases > > must have a "shared build" occurence. > > As a consequence the 32-bit build test is switched to shared linking. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > --- > > devtools/test-meson-builds.sh | 8 ++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > I think this might be better as two patches - one for the ABI check changes > and a second for the example build changes with installed DPDK. Yes could be 2 patches. > > for example in $examples; do > > echo "## Building $example" > > + [ $example = helloworld ] && static=static || static= # save disk space > > $MAKE -C $DESTDIR/usr/local/share/dpdk/examples/$example \ > > - clean shared static >&$veryverbose > > + clean shared $static >&$veryverbose > > done > > fi > > Just wonder are we likely to miss things with this change? Would changing > the order to do a clean at the end to free back up the disk space not > achieve much the same result while still saving disk space? Not building static flavour of most examples is also faster. Ideally we should not rebuild an example if the libs did not change. To the question "will we miss something", the difference between static and shared examples is just the pkg-config call in the Makefile. I think the risk is small.