From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com (mail-wm0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F07E1DB1 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:48:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id r190so19998041wmr.0 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:48:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=uUIcF2PzUdAorz49JA/v9h3KJJXY4TzyLIVqTZo61cE=; b=lBK8bUpxG+G4jC5U+xR2aZoGoqzgTAwNx6/G+t5sns7WfslXePS8OnA0NogN9K0WPE zzXlHUbguw/OfhRrUPukWdWSRscATCavqjyPY9U2RU87FHxiC1mpOSvt97L9TdSFqHLY jIUgZpFDzzaa27sU04XU0f/vE3rNvPAbQLlR1q2NPjNhkbhxtZ20Hfv0mN4r9N8H27t4 topL67+WFXHp6X+ZHHPaTogxC7xn5FwHhLJbs66jxBZJSt8x8J192B7HcXXYmhXeLc/Y sIqGrTQPtoY5AXwBMBZyeTVKpZbVt/Q2aLD09rUyoIFDjmc921TvVYh1WhIVI1ILJNmb wvcQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to; bh=uUIcF2PzUdAorz49JA/v9h3KJJXY4TzyLIVqTZo61cE=; b=BuF7WDpNPIsuVCrCQ3pMcwIZJEX3+HUSfMc+RYE61GHsDOyjD9glpkl8Gmhr5vQtCm +En0VhcvXDZQaEG3JiYOjDEg/Wd1PM2wRVZwNanN++9Q/YURo12lveKDH+2D3cEwoDzT SYRiEK0s2AfrBbxBEfhujIGw3ZfKzdnsOQyF8YBiwzK/VDuUN2xt9LRZZkhkdakA8CKu TyAh0ZMMVDjXWVMj2GztPI3faaFlPlMDK+aztQfg7M7qTtqZqutyRdE++r6UnhJq6vNk OVEF/x64ZLJNi8qZ7EH39i7Y0YyaQiEZQg/NweppEnPHFQOeFEvR+33/Op23fuSXE4Ig I3Bw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tK4useQ8PtggsF1dm1jmsenFQnoStHIU0cTecb0HMFieKa9EY0ZHLd2bgQO4umP4O9l X-Received: by 10.194.59.100 with SMTP id y4mr551760wjq.24.1468838879819; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:47:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 6wind.com (guy78-3-82-239-227-177.fbx.proxad.net. [82.239.227.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q203sm15963188wmd.24.2016.07.18.03.47.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 18 Jul 2016 03:47:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:47:56 +0200 From: Adrien Mazarguil To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <20160718104756.GG7621@6wind.com> Mail-Followup-To: Bruce Richardson , dev@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit References: <20160715210302.GA52536@bricha3-MOBL3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160715210302.GA52536@bricha3-MOBL3> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/10] Fix build errors related to exported headers 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: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:48:00 -0000 On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:03:02PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 03:02:37PM +0200, Adrien Mazarguil wrote: > > DPDK uses GNU C language extensions in most of its code base. This is fine > > for internal source files whose compilation flags are controlled by DPDK, > > however user applications that use exported "public" headers may experience > > compilation failures when enabling strict error/standard checks (-std and > > -pedantic for instance). > > > > Exported headers are installed system-wide and must be as clean as possible > > so applications do not have to resort to workarounds. > > > > This patchset affects exported headers only, compilation problems are > > addressed as follows: > > > > - Adding the __extension__ keyword to nonstandard constructs (same method > > as existing libraries when there is no other choice). > > - Adding the __extension__ keyword to C11 constructs to remain compatible > > with pure C99. > > - Adding missing includes so exported files can be included out of order > > and on their own. > > - Fixing GNU printf-like variadic macros as there is no magic keyword for > > these. > > > > Having upgraded to Fedora 24, I'm seeing quite a few errors compiling with gcc > 6.1.1 in debug mode. Applying this patchset seems to really cut down on those > errors, so may need to be applied for 16.07 release. > > The remaining error I'm seeing is, in mlx drivers, complaints about the > pedantic flag (the flag which I think was causing all the other errors to be > triggered too): > > error: `-pedantic' is not an option that controls warnings Saw this as well with GCC 6, I've planned to drop these #pragmas as soon as possible after this series is applied, however there is some work left to do on the libibverbs side before that. > For this set though, I don't see any new errors introduced into gcc or clang > builds for the libs or drivers, and a number of errors cleared, so: > > Tested-by: Bruce Richardson Thanks for testing. -- Adrien Mazarguil 6WIND