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 6E07DA0093; Tue, 3 May 2022 17:44:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 291B540C35; Tue, 3 May 2022 17:44:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD3C340691 for ; Tue, 3 May 2022 17:44:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB0F25C034D; Tue, 3 May 2022 11:44:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 03 May 2022 11:44:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1651592669; x= 1651679069; bh=ykZJ7baweXvSE/mJCG/zSxC4pXxdgjg2VsjpLpwCRbc=; b=L xW7+QlYZp5ZCixiFBf8DpxgeplqzTJTohoV6oBsEBtF8iD29UIOMakgw0B8Gh1bw w2d6wxMJwoVupWyWV45PtcxaOTNjrKbA4QxDpRlA0PID0CiIVK4K9jE1PbsyJD8z cdV0s7cP7CQv6VwhsrV9JXzvGygjtdY+U2IN1YvjA3O6BJKoox1stoloXmc+oukx NLPNb3p+RGVBHFVWCCrcKZ7VUVAHeSJpvtX/JCOQio78Jf6nmeBlWxjNFsFB/wNu uYljmEVnVZyYUsUVFLERtIwQkDKJ3QXALdw4mkaWLVtrOA3kNj4MhvnM4Dg3VMLJ w4xwD8EO68JJHiUgb47Tg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1651592669; x=1651679069; bh=ykZJ7baweXvSE /mJCG/zSxC4pXxdgjg2VsjpLpwCRbc=; b=MsHl3dOmKHhaDKxf+6mW/0qV3iT7X UGhaDf0ysoho69nyNBcsCLkuNJozKzyHFMscUNoeu9JXwBILLx9JYsH31iqBlNqM PANuQjcz8iXD9iM1jQWJXcK00wcSN9B66HPB/RvdvnRLd8/gtFPYRm+SSQ6C2KcE 2wgIbc5JqlaFCK+UmeRYD+XKvWpBjNKDMRI+7+oXEV5xUA6nElz5nujtBfQ+Ego2 4c9n2gteDuMungPZnXGcRZdKMe5paRgyrESfKQ9aS5JjKp4kbyhty3Wubkx1eZZu cmN9+rdLMZuL3h5PTn4b91+sclFMN7zlnK9EvKp7i7UqVf2aLzA2elODg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvdejgdelvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudekteejfefhgfdtteffkefgheffieejuddugedvkeduuefgffev teehueelueefnecuffhomhgrihhnpehisghmrdgtohhmpdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenuc evlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgr shesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 3 May 2022 11:44:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, David Christensen , Beilei Xing , Matan Azrad , Viacheslav Ovsiienko , Maxime Coquelin , Chenbo Xia , Vladimir Medvedkin Subject: Re: [PATCH] avoid AltiVec keyword vector Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 17:44:26 +0200 Message-ID: <4591093.jE0xQCEvom@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20220503120321.2438479-1-thomas@monjalon.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 03/05/2022 14:30, Bruce Richardson: > On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 02:03:21PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > The keyword "vector" may conflict easily. > > As a rule, it is better to use the alternative keyword "__vector". I forgot to say that we should #undef vector. > hi Thomas, > > could you perhaps clarify a bit more in the log, I'm not aware of it being > a keyword generally. https://www.ibm.com/docs/fr/xl-c-and-cpp-linux/latest?topic=support-vector-types > What would "vector" conflict with? > If it's a keyword is it possible to use it as a variable name in these files? It conflicts with anything named as "vector" if you include AltiVec header file. It is especially a problem when using C++ vector type, that's why the keyword vector is not defined with C++: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.h#L45 The workaround is to #undef vector after including altivec.h, or directly in rte_altivec.h (with a compatibility breakage). In any case we should use only __vector keyword to allow such #undef.