From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35E8591F for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2015 12:52:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Nov 2015 03:52:46 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,251,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="679658878" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.208.62]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 06 Nov 2015 03:52:45 -0800 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 06 Nov 2015 11:52:44 +0025 Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 11:52:44 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: Adrien Mazarguil , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20151106115244.GB13920@bricha3-MOBL3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] ethdev: move error checking macros to header 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: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 11:52:48 -0000 +Adrien on To: line Email user/client fail on original. :-( ----- Forwarded message from Bruce Richardson ----- Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 11:49:05 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: Stephen Hemminger , Thomas Monjalon , dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] ethdev: move error checking macros to header User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 04:09:18PM +0100, Adrien Mazarguil wrote: > Bruce is asking for a consensus about -pedantic, whether we want to do the > extra effort to support it in DPDK. Since I like checking for -pedantic > errors, it's enabled for mlx4 and mlx5 when compiling these drivers in > debugging mode. There is currently no established rule in DPDK against this. > > I'm arguing that most C headers (C compiler, libc, most libraries, even the > Linux kernel in uapi to an extent) provide standards compliant includes > because they cannot predict or force particular compilation flags on > user applications. > > If we consider DPDK as a system wide library, I think we should do it as > well in all installed header files. If we choose not to, then we must > document that our code is not standard, -pedantic is unsupported and I'll > have to drop it from mlx4 and mlx5. > > -- > Adrien Mazarguil > 6WIND Hi Adrien, I'm trying to dig into this a bit more now, and try out using a static inline function, but I'm having trouble getting DPDK to compile with the mlx drivers turned on in the config. I'm trying to follow the instructions here: http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/nics/mlx4.html, but it's not clearly called out what requirements are for compilation vs requirements for running the PMD. I'm running Fedora 23, and installed the libibverbs-devel package, but when I compile I get the following error: == Build drivers/net/mlx4 CC mlx4.o /home/bruce/ethdev-cleanup/drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c: In function ‘txq_cleanup’: /home/bruce/ethdev-cleanup/drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c:886:37: error: storage size of ‘params’ isn’t known struct ibv_exp_release_intf_params params; ^ compilation terminated due to -Wfatal-errors. Any suggestions on the fix for this? Thanks, /Bruce