From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f43.google.com (mail-pg0-f43.google.com [74.125.83.43]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BD2E11C5 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2017 18:27:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id v18so17656179pgb.1 for ; Thu, 08 Jun 2017 09:27:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5O1G9jSlg6U7ukCVeGTIK1BRBJLLKmPKv2eMcLfu2KY=; b=KmkydD/SuGGDckF9bFgbWB5nX1RNqmbEoI7YvAdT5x/gMoYaS7YqCT+kESxgeRaXQl 5tEtmrIJJyN4ul0jJDJtvHjyBSXz9uGHi7w5ohFlFagMMNJTdWBg80AN23NcQHIFD7Wj ZOm9zr2GnwuYyFLqHI+ldtDApEcQ16CI+LE6BWpXpwG+bcXKc4lJaR0G2ybAkPS15APZ hilqYxxon3fQjC/AQJgl1VIB0Hqw911z51MKGh8Y3lcG+RvTRekIRUzjVpEhMaApCdj3 87S6AfPReOpbTPvQp8dEI80UhPGRqQwc57j0T5GrTUo6TQ5KiszJEUB/9NLo7sF1QwhM CGcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5O1G9jSlg6U7ukCVeGTIK1BRBJLLKmPKv2eMcLfu2KY=; b=obaG8ZzmAQ8dAQBa5210so41avcNpwdAYtxLBsrU0MqxkWaKsDTDhrteY6kKnKdn9u B1nZmaPp+W4eOGtyfhthEC39BXEd23Oo9zVXZlI3gT+Fcm+iSahgyxCYykjhyFdHFfQ/ KJyquGvZ8a0/FBgtIRXpuPfVqBhf5imSNLuGiVmWHcoSf/dYWyonmDqkSmy9rXRf/je8 chThOI6nXoSHVU+HuUsA9Qx9Ie7qVSlwOOkMwW2BlfuEnB1uV2JS0BVOyCXqs4f0VaAj blGyX/O4M3Pii5Loo/7GCIHNuKxocT2MFkX3uQULkc9gKiEeI/0GDuudj1ZYCXmIa1yN b0Wg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcD2VTtT6Y/kq4xgflxThGtkIi7KRrOIIA6cbCmR6NmggkdiM5m8 NV9581eCWeq7Qe3h X-Received: by 10.84.217.152 with SMTP id p24mr35154908pli.206.1496939226110; Thu, 08 Jun 2017 09:27:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xeon-e3 (76-14-207-240.or.wavecable.com. [76.14.207.240]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f71sm12663027pfd.98.2017.06.08.09.27.05 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 08 Jun 2017 09:27:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 09:26:58 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20170608092658.6a4bfc5c@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <20170608085901.GC58216@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20170607104743.275149-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20170607162617.00d009ff@xeon-e3> <20170608085901.GC58216@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH] replace DPDK config and build system 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 16:27:07 -0000 On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 09:59:01 +0100 Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 04:26:17PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 11:47:42 +0100 > > Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > > > The prototype is incomplete, but it does build a reasonable number of our > > > libraries, some unit tests, the i40e PMD and the testpmd binary, and I have > > > successfully passed traffic using testpmd from the build. Some things are > > > not fully correct, e.g. static builds aren't working right now, as I haven't > > > correctly done all the dependency tracking, I think, and the cpu flag > > > detection has issues. It also has only been tried on x86_64 linux, on a > > > couple of systems, so YMMV. However, I feel it's a reasonable enough start > > > point to show what we might be able to achieve. > > > > Remember that in many cases the build system and the target system are different. > > One of the problems with previous DPDK builds where build system was on bare metal > > but deployment target was on a more limited VM environment. I sweated through > > lots of pain on that. > > Yep, and I'm not going to claim that this is going to solve world hunger > here :-) or that switching is going to be easy. However, talking of > building and deploying on different targets, meson is designed to allow > cross-compilation, see for example the built-in objects for > "build_machine", "host_machine" and "target_machine": > http://mesonbuild.com/Reference-manual.html#build_machine-object > > Also, one thing I did add into this prototype was some build argument > support to test how that would work. By default, when you run meson, it > will set up the cflags to pass in -march=native, much as is done by our > default targets now. However, this is easily changed when doing your own > builds, for example, to do two different builds in different directories: > > $ meson native_build > ... > Checking for value of define "__PCLMUL__": 1 > Checking for value of define "__AVX__": 1 > Checking for value of define "__AVX2__": 1 > ... > > $ meson -Dmachine=ivybridge ivybridge_build > ... > Checking for value of define "__PCLMUL__": 1 > Checking for value of define "__AVX__": 1 > Checking for value of define "__AVX2__": > ... > > This way you can easily set up different builds for different machine > targets, with different instruction set levels, as seen from where the > second case above did not report AVX2 support. The project-specific > options are given in meson_options.txt. See also relevant section in > meson docs: http://mesonbuild.com/Build-options.html > > Regards, > /Bruce On a side note, it would be good to use the GCC extensions that allow building different versions of the same routine into one binary.