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 EC07FA0613 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 19:53:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C101BFD1; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 19:53:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B101BF03 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 19:53:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 706B321EFE; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:53:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:53:04 -0400 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=M6SdLeJ/YCl7DBJWosbpdsMlfYrcc9QoK9Rq7+1eBPk=; b=hmep8hT1Stjg rbBGl/oy/Icy2ax87VMTWQ28+2hX0GLchEDMzFTOfD1EgcaHRZBTaal3KySX3r1x qIWo8cmo9Q6GZUagOBjnZT2/4sO9fiY6T8kmoQedxDcYX+czHiPBc/QMSttDM1Z1 XdcTppHc2z58j2MruafT2Xu/a/PdGqA= 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=fm3; bh=M6SdLeJ/YCl7DBJWosbpdsMlfYrcc9QoK9Rq7+1eB Pk=; b=02j1cQZJI+Ayi+skl+QxuyayWVKT9DKCsHitbG2vpdJqycElDeJUOvtiS mO82m5XK8NXIJkcobrTgjpQ4AA98Zck+1OqXPvnKw1PhRB3u1U967kV3wJM0tUEs HMY3RUCTSXO9b085NOsZsMmgDZqhhmQUm0/CI/qyq1jyvFpK7G/f0T/ps2hDU2IZ 3GabnoQhm9XGlKFfm6DGZ4CAy66jNUHxPVvV1mV0Rto/e4znXv4ve8ss164KI4Vo jGvbuRyKqvsBWwpJ2GlW8f5cO9lE9FaRu+pcYKPFez2eexKahazEsSk1qqOG7tjw YPFCd1NIHDKFg/8AzFBnZIdl2uevg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrleefgdduudeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpeguphgukhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtne cuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2E6C1380075; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:53:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Konstantin Ananyev Cc: dev@dpdk.org, olivier.matz@6wind.com Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 19:53:01 +0200 Message-ID: <10104652.MOWmfaWtsW@xps> In-Reply-To: <20190730101927.1665-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> References: <20190730101927.1665-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] examples/bpf: fix compilation issue 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" 30/07/2019 12:19, Konstantin Ananyev: > Example BPF programs t1.c, t2.c, t3.c in folder examples/bpf are > failing to compile with latest dpdk.org master. > The reason is changes in some core DPDK header files, that causes > now inclusion of x86 specific headers. > To overcome the issue, minimize inclusion of DPDK header files > into BPF source code. > > Bugzilla ID: 321 > > Fixes: 9dfc06c26a8b ("test/bpf: add samples") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Reported-by: Michel Machado > Suggested-by: Michel Machado > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev > --- > examples/bpf/mbuf.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) I think that's really a bad idea to have this file. The BPF applications are supposed to update their own copy of mbuf? Please could you try to include rte_mbuf.h instead of duplicating the mbuf layout?