From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07587DE0 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:54:47 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id q58so420528wes.31 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:56:01 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:organization:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=7cU1o/RB7Ev55OU/k+sdp0PBN2eC1TYPm8oidewg5jo=; b=JtiR17m8XhqwIP5lDOasp+JWkQoW9EHv5uJ3cyNQ2PK7oWCnpMYrUp8Clwr+xGaztQ BJAlJ8NOvdVszFxb8hjF+c0FhiG9dYm9IkrQbDsS1IK5uLtuZMK3BNIxyNhm1Y8xXD8d ao5v1N2hktsQgdaphwQZPbO5vnHbAcWaQLQa1B05WJLMWQ02xPYGvJRMF0EWUSG6PN2q NWHAtnSGmcsFVurk7iTzmQinC90zzXaACiZRvgGWdMuCg/eqkR1kt6LQ7+eai4tZsT7N IurSM2EOI4Nm1LjRXhOEdvj/6gu4z3L8OFKboU2R0TqocrAvJAHvrn9h++frDBX3N4Eq GZog== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlehRiaSJsEDbpPt6ikTYnQNeFs9WO7DxiRZyEoada+kh/KYqit9OLQGi1cUkYNma7C43kl X-Received: by 10.194.75.198 with SMTP id e6mr27266578wjw.3.1389707761492; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:56:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from angus.localnet (6wind.net2.nerim.net. [213.41.180.237]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fp4sm23291694wic.11.2014.01.14.05.55.59 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:56:00 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon Organization: 6WIND To: "Venkatesan, Venky" Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:55:57 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; ) References: <8A452F53-AD44-4C3C-8AB0-AD3342206D46@nyansa.com> <201401141238.30056.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <1FD9B82B8BF2CF418D9A1000154491D973FC5A42@ORSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1FD9B82B8BF2CF418D9A1000154491D973FC5A42@ORSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201401141455.57994.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Any benefit of using DPDK's makefiles instead of using your own and linking against DPDK library X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:54:48 -0000 Hello Venky, 14/01/2014 14:22, Venkatesan, Venky: > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon > > 14/01/2014 08:02, Daniel Kan: > > > I already have existing makefiles for my current application. I would > > > like to integrate dpdk into the application. =E2=80=99m wondering if= there is > > > any benefit to use dpdk=E2=80=99s makefiles instead of using your own= makefile > > > and linking against the library (e.g. libintel_dpdk.a). Thanks. > >=20 > > DPDK makefiles have 2 benefits: > > - provide a framework > > - automatically set CFLAGS and LDFLAGS according to your configuration > >=20 > > If you don't need a framework, I think it's better to extract compilati= on > > flags with something like pkg-config. > > http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/pkg-config > > A patch for a such feature would be welcome :) > > One other thing to think about - as we add more functionality into DPDK > (e.g. new libraries for other packet functions), we integrate them into > the DPDK framework. If you extract compilation flags and setup your own > makefile, you would have to do this re-integration every time you want to > pick up a new release. The same applies to newer files added etc. etc. > That is the downside. I disagree. If the Makefile of the application, use a DPDK script or pkg-config to read= =20 the flags from a generated file, the integration is done only once. This guide explains the logic and how to implement it: http://people.freedesktop.org/~dbn/pkg-config-guide.html =2D-=20 Thomas