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 AA57BA034F; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 08:48:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73C7C4014D; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 08:48:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-relay-internal-0.canonical.com (smtp-relay-internal-0.canonical.com [185.125.188.122]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813FC40142 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 08:48:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-qk1-f198.google.com (mail-qk1-f198.google.com [209.85.222.198]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay-internal-0.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 493943F19B for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 07:47:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canonical.com; s=20210705; t=1636530479; bh=0HWxxIYc5TMp6H9jmY2BK1jgLScLB75j8XTFmx4vWyk=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=PP4RDEwzjFDzGQMErQwcD5iUpiuiFKaPklXP7pFijH3XwcIGnikiRCfhFLYB996Nu vZ+KMMmRlgTsEp1krkAVC0fsJzHPSBnqC2PEnh2QHqb1lUaGsN9aS4X7hTRaejTuLi ieHLfeukPzzhqc7ZQBrcmXUNMDcFSRBDw71PvzXGrycyCtoooMjOh0wb6Vvx5x5QtQ E4wBcjC0zE1lGvCdKWZecJ+cIM54PwVmsqqMX9pI1U1ra1VsAuCPOy94Jf8uxW/bey 9NVD6FHAkH3GuEq0HBtZW0QR9Lt2nopXkU2UGLEQI3dc/aVc7rB3rt+eOENkg+L9jB /ZTeyMRaFISNg== Received: by mail-qk1-f198.google.com with SMTP id az10-20020a05620a170a00b00462e059180eso1291091qkb.19 for ; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 23:47:59 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0HWxxIYc5TMp6H9jmY2BK1jgLScLB75j8XTFmx4vWyk=; b=t3cGKtNHFRdjS28AM49+6mly4Se653OjTD9LyBoU9t6rxUAGNQU2WuB7vwhBnJi8p1 nhljR8SypDaNuvZqxCikTWCJOCDoL9DSLj6bKtUCMqYZ4eIeEuvmHkHd3OPynUHuoaEn bh+Zgs9LJhjDexhDV/obVojfFsdAhzDv/dXmvHTNVMuJet27DbPjFoBLjUvoSehWADsy D5hszNO2NZwk0UvvQl6MOygOFBHowexM3czo6nO1T4YM/svkXQk7vZy0HfTOskV7sd7g Eso0DX+V2U3pHqDpJ1rCqnIj2xhflf514cb/taT+KuBRL4dnPcXz4Ep5wwmhNHB/WU6T gcCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532tNaU7FDAHw9z2LtR3lsV3UVMOGlIACC7pqfCsbrhLZiaRN1IY JXfLM9s3tTsjfHJMw/En5TfHUwXcnl4AZGdPjEIaZP4a/w/SzxWETzT4v/Jcb7GnF4qsEiADWpg oAgFcmsiKeQL/z+J7N/vA2aL3+mcBE0KJ3YFE X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:240b:: with SMTP id d11mr10824664qkn.455.1636530478342; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 23:47:58 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwoeEGPpFbOgOGnMdHld2wF3tG6g4YyozPnyYgjdq1csYU+xiw9C9mE2ogzgVm44gxYGq34De4AQLEjOl3n/ss= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:240b:: with SMTP id d11mr10824650qkn.455.1636530478171; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 23:47:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Christian Ehrhardt Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 08:47:32 +0100 Message-ID: To: Ruifeng Wang Cc: Jan Viktorin , dev , Luca Boccassi , =?UTF-8?Q?Juraj_Linke=C5=A1?= , Honnappa Nagarahalli , nd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Probing the expected state/support of DPDK@armhf 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 Sender: "dev" On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 8:17 AM Ruifeng Wang wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christian Ehrhardt > > Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 8:32 PM > > To: Jan Viktorin ; Ruifeng Wang > > ; dev > > Cc: Luca Boccassi > > Subject: Probing the expected state/support of DPDK@armhf > > > > Hi, > > I wanted to ask about the current state of DPDK@armhf (not arm64, that > > seems fine AFAICS). > > Since there are too many arms today, I mean armhf as in [0]. > I think armhf in question refers to armv7. > > > > > What I see when building DPDK 21.11 is > > 2973 ../config/meson.build:364:1: ERROR: Problem encountered: Number of > > CPU cores not specified. > > > > Right now this seems to be broken the same everywhere - Suse [1], fedora > > [2], Debian/Ubuntu [3] > Looks like this happens with native build on armv7 machine. RTE_MAX_LCORE is not set for the build. Thanks for the hint, just FYI using the newer -Dplatform=generic without specifying the machine as we did in the past yields the same issue. I understand that every custom built project needs it's little special twist, but that (ask for the lowest common denominator) is exactly what generic builds in Distributions will need. > > I'm not asking for a fix for this particular issue (although I guess people would > > be happy), but more about the general state of DPDK@armhf. > > > > Debian and Ubuntu used to build it on armhf as well, but over the recent > > years I feel (no hard data) that usage there was next to none. > > > > OTOH Thomas said that recently people cared about armv7 [4] > > > > My suggestion would be to disable the build on armhf in Debian/Ubuntu > > (+elsewhere?) until it reaches a more stable phase and real use-cases. > > But maybe I missed some use-cases, therefore I wanted to reach out to the > > mailing list to probe for more opinions on this. > I'm not aware of amount of users that using DPDK on armv7. But [4] suggests that there is real use case. > I think the build on armhf does have value. It helps to maintain general status on armv7. That is one of > the reason why user [4] can enable armv7 cross compile smoothly. > I suggest to keep the build and fix the failure. > > > > > Thanks for your thoughts on this in advance! > > > > P.S. If it is meant to work and be supported, then we will need a fix for that > Hi Juraj, > Can you have a look at the issue? > > > > > [0]: https://wiki.debian.org/ArmHardFloatPort > > [1]: > > https://build.opensuse.org/public/build/home:bluca:dpdk/openSUSE_Facto > > ry_ARM/armv7l/dpdk/_log > > [2]: > > https://build.opensuse.org/public/build/home:bluca:dpdk/Fedora_35/armv > > 7l/dpdk/_log > > [3]: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/567810935/buildlog_ubuntu-jammy- > > armhf.dpdk_21.11~rc1-1u~ppa1_BUILDING.txt.gz > > [4]: https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20210610111839.7481-1- > > s.chandrakant@globaledgesoft.com/ > > > > -- > > Christian Ehrhardt > > Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server > > Canonical Ltd -- Christian Ehrhardt Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server Canonical Ltd