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 7D56FA04B8 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:04:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55D599E4; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:04:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A4B237; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:04:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB08222056; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 01:04:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 01:04:42 -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=mesmtp; bh=pks/uusufvvCuyLS8GLRcLTy0pZZxHAhdm9rUUKrqg4=; b=DLYhCZknNP9l Uif4y7gujtKLKTZp4G3j4UvU1XPkFFZK8R9SEU3njVZfq+051BCc0RDG7Lc2Xg0m ckwPyTsFTEpZbhVbWYpmMKOWDHAc/ZFT0BOvu4Mte8I+3DjdMuftABP1nGhGmdWa lELNrqSIhPEEy2gwAwybs/zedMeLu6U= 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=pks/uusufvvCuyLS8GLRcLTy0pZZxHAhdm9rUUKrq g4=; b=PH8xeb7XQjXyd2NIKsqRGL8YK7AdUPOjGCF4LnthrCTQAeCPP9EoD/8BB 9wtCLFj6ludCdoWG7uepQWDdQqUOE8i1Igw0ABtwxaNH8tkGbFr47yEKkLVD7Yx9 S8And+jLvwheypVkEb/wtjbZCW3LUMJh1dmPD9fpfcq66e7aRCCsljRebefQImPr 6rJWuirUKn0dVnm9EA6cuM7KvGYFJhLnuMJX6T5UQkAnKBgrJLJa48RXWdeCJvtS RXWxU58dBrdM+6pIOePuGne3qNeZMQcqRpfN2LJTxcvdU/CC1NTYoDvQHDfT6i8O qCMCpdY5k8bvyCL8cjRSXnox1+DdA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedruddvkedgfeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehvrghrshdrmhhkpdhhuhgrrhhmrdgtohhmpdhgnhhurdhorhhgnecukfhp peefjedrudeigedrledrudehudenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrg hssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (unknown [37.164.9.151]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6570D8005B; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 01:03:26 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Phil Yang (Arm Technology China)" Cc: Bruce Richardson , "dev@dpdk.org" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "jerinj@marvell.com" , Honnappa Nagarahalli , "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" , "Joyce Kong (Arm Technology China)" , nd , "stable@dpdk.org" Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:03:18 +0100 Message-ID: <3677391.EzyCDiKdWj@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <1573468461-25972-1-git-send-email-phil.yang@arm.com> <20191111104712.GB1444@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] mk: fix unsupported flag error on armhf architercture X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" 12/11/2019 06:25, Phil Yang (Arm Technology China): > From: Bruce Richardson > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 06:34:20PM +0800, Phil Yang wrote: > > > The older version (e.g. version 7.4.0 ) of GNU C compiler for the armhf > > > architecture doesn't support the flag '-Wno-address-of-packed-member', > > > so remove this flag for aarch32. > > > > > > Fixes: a385972c3675 ("mk: disable warning for packed member pointer") > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Phil Yang > > > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu > > > Tested-by: Joyce Kong > > > > > > --- > > > mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk | 2 ++ > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk b/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk > > > index 9fc7041..ec0cbbf 100644 > > > --- a/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk > > > +++ b/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk > > > @@ -100,7 +100,9 @@ WERROR_FLAGS += -Wno-format-truncation > > > endif > > > > > > # disable packed member unalign warnings > > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM), y) > > > WERROR_FLAGS += -Wno-address-of-packed-member > > > +endif > > > > > You don't need to do this, as gcc will not complain about this unknown flag > > unless you have other issues in your code.[1] I think it's better to keep the > > code clean in this case, otherwise we'll have the code littered with > > conditionals for various flags. > > > > /Bruce > > > > [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html > > "When an unrecognized warning option is requested (e.g., > > -Wunknown-warning), GCC emits a diagnostic stating that the option is not > > recognized. However, if the -Wno- form is used, the behavior is slightly > > different: no diagnostic is produced for -Wno-unknown-warning unless other > > diagnostics are being produced. This allows the use of new -Wno- options > > with old compilers, but if something goes wrong, the compiler warns that an > > unrecognized option is present." > > Thanks, Bruce. > > There are thousands of warnings with alignment when compiling for ARMv7 (ARMv7 supports unaligned memory access). > Without this new flag, the build system works fine for ARMv7. So I add this conditional for ARMv7 only. > I agree with you we should clean up the code, but it needs a lot of effort to achieve that. > This patch is going to make the ARMv7 target build successfully during this period. I would go the opposite direction. I think we should remove all warnings disablement like "-Wno-something", and clean the code. If you want to allow building ARMv7, you can just allow warnings as not errors. So we will still see something is wrong but it won't prevent from building.