From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F01A0A0E
	for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Tue, 11 May 2021 17:56:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C2574003E;
	Tue, 11 May 2021 17:56:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-oo1-f42.google.com (mail-oo1-f42.google.com
 [209.85.161.42]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC2604003E
 for <stable@dpdk.org>; Tue, 11 May 2021 17:56:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-oo1-f42.google.com with SMTP id
 s24-20020a4aead80000b02901fec6deb28aso4288997ooh.11
 for <stable@dpdk.org>; Tue, 11 May 2021 08:56:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google;
 h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc; bh=WmbsvrS5KobXgmcc4dGuV9lW65Gn9KI3RDE19MjFZ9w=;
 b=ai+feoPi8FV2UYkwW/+lWAgkgmzFjqe90G3xQ+YUlLBVT+7xPpqWgoDPunf/dZ8kIa
 edgL5jzmbzpAkr6/Cl29ehReC9cmGBWdpt2KU628L5uaPu+uV7NnL1gI2meBQsnjHndy
 8IQOxOrd8N9ylEVbuEYhi4kqoZO+2EqV/2uHg=
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:cc;
 bh=WmbsvrS5KobXgmcc4dGuV9lW65Gn9KI3RDE19MjFZ9w=;
 b=A8cax0IlzW43dbtexomHShCprp6aANB0SHJCPzdu0ujOeLtkDHKpkW9bO0dCPAJ7H2
 EsFMOLJ1GwjUI7BKhbUy0HMArv8iuoVOOjgPVxWEioAhzTg8gMxHZmM03bPqQzohrxDy
 qWWkFSUahAP0rsdvvDRBuKv2xb/2CCrTWpaE4MNG3/d65ml/mry9FYpFqehwzE6y4BJe
 Yb8HoQhzEehl4HfA3hMAmC6Cd5uGt0R5dbFimT9kIWTlAXdhR91gSj+2eJUHv75BcnMu
 GGv9tgNfXXv2Oo0y1oRpuCXC6vuO5Wr7hhLWcby0lcie6+8BYMBQOLz1IymWfZZVGgjr
 a01w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5334fbs/2ZCYbyYVS09sCJogpJQs9u/REWKtdsxyy+jv5Wa2KgeB
 UsSQUORQHs7ornmp3JDIOJDceA6LnqZ7vuRp82MxNw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxnXZG5XeaFmhoYzyNsIpeCfXO+55FN52QFbd/W5+xfHsbLZCjvVb54pq0DEC5P+i36YeRwXYswTdCXz9Bu0W4=
X-Received: by 2002:a4a:625c:: with SMTP id y28mr23800125oog.45.1620748592095; 
 Tue, 11 May 2021 08:56:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210507181025.84012-1-lance.richardson@broadcom.com>
 <20210511144554.146987-1-lance.richardson@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210511144554.146987-1-lance.richardson@broadcom.com>
From: Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 11:56:20 -0400
Message-ID: <CADyeNEBtdqDE+KCJi3=VyME5x46X7rsKVQUD0ucqsvkn4k7TTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com>, 
 Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile <navasile@linux.microsoft.com>,
 Dmitry Malloy <dmitrym@microsoft.com>, 
 Pallavi Kadam <pallavi.kadam@intel.com>
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, 
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature";
 micalg=sha-256; boundary="0000000000001f8b6d05c20ff0a8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4] eal: fix memory mapping for 32-bit
 targets
X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/stable>,
 <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/stable>,
 <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "stable" <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>

--0000000000001f8b6d05c20ff0a8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

>  v4: Identical to v1, with <sys/types.h> now included in rte_eal_paging.h
>      to (hopefully) make off_t available for Windows builds.

With this version, using off_t is no longer a problem, however based on the
new compilation error it appears that for Windows, off_t is a 32-bit type
while size_t is a 64-bit type:

../lib/eal/windows/eal_memory.c:519:37: error: shift count >= width of
type [-Werror,-Wshift-count-overflow]
DWORD offset_high = (DWORD)(offset >> 32);
^  ~~

So the options seem to be to either use uint64_t for the offset parameter
as in patch v3, or else introduce something like:
     typedef uint64_t rte_off_t;

Thoughts/opinions?

--0000000000001f8b6d05c20ff0a8--