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 613DCA0553; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:10:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA0D1DA9F; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:10:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-vk1-f177.google.com (mail-vk1-f177.google.com [209.85.221.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D49491DA9E for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:10:25 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-vk1-f177.google.com with SMTP id b2so4693238vkk.4 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 08:10:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IG0mkOsIZyoBT7zBgah68cReb2Eb5e7NlLH1N/dQ3xA=; b=DIcfs70/rYmKbhoO74Z/T6J3DAmmwdClSYMt8u4AUrBoE46yYbswsMacfoC0Enu3Nw vX6tXINhNeu1bBH4tfBhtFAxbBpyb1CpSpMYOB8S5uzZ2+txI8vecZeALI/maMbv7I4p 9CgvQEXDF0bA9J1WYqnPkxX15kclPhpHJzxgOTM9MuHAHswsq0RYVZrQmEcGV7PyYQlz 8uqqdK2tKQKCtRfHazShSt9hKOTJYKzZUIJKiE1fTEugWcj+Yanu9UMTx1wr8DPIGzij 6kMe4boZZ7jdYR9UrHKqxhnSzJmzNbfWP8UZlh9LcNarvrIm+8wgJnkt/nbUc+/zJLoq nGsQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=IG0mkOsIZyoBT7zBgah68cReb2Eb5e7NlLH1N/dQ3xA=; b=NJzOHi4GQai859l/ZsGrRMTlKPE51KugTsHsI5SNBg+WVEyihQ3+Ic/9XNiHTIQDln /YusE41NxoghgK5O4WNcYpb9Jtjb5hLzJJ/8HWTv4Qq3QvELQQCf3Zvwpp2eJf7/ap70 c2mUMfaotg5sGTERN8EkgMhSj1I87eHxj5QpsJAeg34eASG0wOsdXokHTOBEh3nshqX6 Z+rvwpicyRZH1WQvKnY6BXg6dN0mYbwKecPTE3Sqe4VwF97KBGuS4XkJwDIKMxOgai2X qqKTQn3MlF5QcMYjyF127JJDnXnkuORB7IXaa8gRI+nYVf6/D6dZTHVg5gtdqN1UzMHB Gvgw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUwaGL5zcnnPJ8LoytXSdGKdr8oJwBBDR43qkIDTDlGwBVwdWvZ JuxpMHG9jKq/J0tk8uowPGvRFPF4QitPFmvWjpuGLg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw9tOpm4cusGAtHJRW226g/1icGY18Veiwr9WxtpibovuTrb8jLK6z7lANwj8PrBNfOCkWshTk/bbwOJnqt6ks= X-Received: by 2002:ac5:c914:: with SMTP id t20mr5907722vkl.37.1581955825036; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 08:10:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200217143958.GA866@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Victor Huertas Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:10:13 +0100 Message-ID: To: dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-dev] Fwd: Proposal to add a new toolchain for dpdk: g++ 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" Thanks Bruce for your answer, I will try it and let you know. Although I guess that it makes no difference if, instead of an exe file, I am compiling a static library (libmylibrary.a), right? BTW, I would like to insist on the second issue I was referring to in my first reply about ip pipeline example using software rings and the latency detected (which may reach 3-4ms per pipeline transition as long as the two connected pipelines are configured tu run in the same logical core and the respective f_run functions are placed in the same thread consecutively). The thing is that I may have in my application up to 5 o 6 pipelines interconnected and the accumulated delay detected a ping crossing all these pipelines becomes 55 ms RTT!!. The latency problem desapeers if I assign a different logical core to every pipeline. Thanks a lot for your quick response. It is really appreciated. Regards, El lun., 17 feb. 2020 a las 15:40, Bruce Richardson (< bruce.richardson@intel.com>) escribi=C3=B3: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 11:01:21AM +0100, Victor Huertas wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I am using DPDK development environment to develop an application from > > which I have to access C++ code. > > I managed to modify some internal mk files in the dpdk-stable repositor= y > to > > allow g++ compiler to be supported. > > > > I have all the modified files well identified and I wonder if the suppo= rt > > team is interested to add this toolchain in future DPDK releases. > > > Rather than trying to build DPDK with g++, or to use the DPDK makefiles > with your C++ application, can I recommend instead that you treat DPDK as > any third-party library and build it independently of your application. > > If you compile and install DPDK using meson and ninja - or install the > DPDK package from your linux distro - you will have a 'libdpdk.pc' file > installed for use by pkg-config. Then for building your application, put = in > the relevant calls to pkg-config i.e. 'pkg-config --cflags libdpdk' and > 'pkg-config --libs libdpdk', into your app makefile and work from there. > > Note too, that all DPDK header files should already be safe for inclusion > in C++ code - if not, please log a bug. > > Regards, > /Bruce > --=20 Victor --=20 Victor