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 9949F1B490 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:19:51 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Apr 2019 08:19:50 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,304,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="334659477" Received: from yexl-server.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.67.110.206]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Apr 2019 08:19:50 -0700 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 23:14:58 +0800 From: Ye Xiaolong To: Luca Boccassi Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20190403151458.GC36385@intel.com> References: <20190403095939.GA32340@intel.com> <56ce5855b02d47a085a8d36451561c400f0b039c.camel@debian.org> <0dde8c20e9992047f29d39ad45dcf511244a5297.camel@debian.org> <80c81c0c-cf64-59f8-a592-26cd865fbd89@intel.com> <37073834d0b9a9f5a6e9f39bac3adc5eb29779ab.camel@debian.org> <5bc49c51-04f4-6f73-889d-d3c0ff749784@intel.com> <46d92b70a40581462f5ee3ba301c793c4cf0c2df.camel@debian.org> <20190403144327.GB36385@intel.com> <8f1ac08396f0deaca458201370c08b1334ee6b84.camel@debian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8f1ac08396f0deaca458201370c08b1334ee6b84.camel@debian.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 1/1] net/af_xdp: introduce AF XDP PMD driver 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: Wed, 03 Apr 2019 15:19:53 -0000 On 04/03, Luca Boccassi wrote: >On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 22:43 +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> On 04/03, Luca Boccassi wrote: >> [snip] >> > > Got it. >> > > >> > > In above steps, 'libbpf' also build from kernel source tree, will >> > > it >> > > be problem >> > > in you builds to not have it build from source? >> > > >> > > If not, taking into account that xsk.h also will be fixed, only >> > > 'tools/include/asm/barrier.h' remains the problem, and it looks >> > > like >> > > it can be >> > > solved, please check above. >> > >> > libbpf is already packaged separately in Debian and I think other >> > distros will follow soon, so it's all good for me once the barrier >> > issue is solved. >> > >> > https://packages.debian.org/buster/libbpf-dev >> > >> > >> > From the makefile's perspective it should not matter where it comes >> > from - the headers should be expected to be in /usr/include and the >> > library in /usr/lib* - and pkg-config can help with that if >> > available. >> > And if a user wants to use a custom path, then it's no different >> > than >> > any of the other dependencies on other external libraries >> >> From tools/lib/bpf/Makefile, after make install_lib and make >> install_headers, >> the headers and library would be put in /usr/local/include/bpf and >> /usr/local/lib*, >> Is it ok? > >Yes certainly that's fine, that's expected for local installations, and >users can specify a prefix with the upstream's makefile if they want to >install somewhere else. In my local test, if I run `make install_lib` to install the libbpf.so to /usr/local/lib64, `-lbpf` specified in af_xdp pmd still fails to find the library, the build would end up with a lot of undefined references which are defined in libbpf. It means during dpdk compilation, it won't search libraries in /usr/local/lib*, right? Install the libbpf to /usr/lib64 via `make install_lib prefix=/usr` doesn't have this issue, so shall I just document it in af_xdp.rst or there is other proper way to do it? Thanks, Xiaolong > >-- >Kind regards, >Luca Boccassi From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90436A0679 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:19:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65EED1B49B; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:19:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9949F1B490 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:19:51 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Apr 2019 08:19:50 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,304,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="334659477" Received: from yexl-server.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.67.110.206]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Apr 2019 08:19:50 -0700 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 23:14:58 +0800 From: Ye Xiaolong To: Luca Boccassi Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20190403151458.GC36385@intel.com> References: <20190403095939.GA32340@intel.com> <56ce5855b02d47a085a8d36451561c400f0b039c.camel@debian.org> <0dde8c20e9992047f29d39ad45dcf511244a5297.camel@debian.org> <80c81c0c-cf64-59f8-a592-26cd865fbd89@intel.com> <37073834d0b9a9f5a6e9f39bac3adc5eb29779ab.camel@debian.org> <5bc49c51-04f4-6f73-889d-d3c0ff749784@intel.com> <46d92b70a40581462f5ee3ba301c793c4cf0c2df.camel@debian.org> <20190403144327.GB36385@intel.com> <8f1ac08396f0deaca458201370c08b1334ee6b84.camel@debian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8f1ac08396f0deaca458201370c08b1334ee6b84.camel@debian.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 1/1] net/af_xdp: introduce AF XDP PMD driver 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" Message-ID: <20190403151458.1VjiTTly0tFO_3P0O2B5SrTXqLMtFlZjUlBlKaBzXiA@z> On 04/03, Luca Boccassi wrote: >On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 22:43 +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> On 04/03, Luca Boccassi wrote: >> [snip] >> > > Got it. >> > > >> > > In above steps, 'libbpf' also build from kernel source tree, will >> > > it >> > > be problem >> > > in you builds to not have it build from source? >> > > >> > > If not, taking into account that xsk.h also will be fixed, only >> > > 'tools/include/asm/barrier.h' remains the problem, and it looks >> > > like >> > > it can be >> > > solved, please check above. >> > >> > libbpf is already packaged separately in Debian and I think other >> > distros will follow soon, so it's all good for me once the barrier >> > issue is solved. >> > >> > https://packages.debian.org/buster/libbpf-dev >> > >> > >> > From the makefile's perspective it should not matter where it comes >> > from - the headers should be expected to be in /usr/include and the >> > library in /usr/lib* - and pkg-config can help with that if >> > available. >> > And if a user wants to use a custom path, then it's no different >> > than >> > any of the other dependencies on other external libraries >> >> From tools/lib/bpf/Makefile, after make install_lib and make >> install_headers, >> the headers and library would be put in /usr/local/include/bpf and >> /usr/local/lib*, >> Is it ok? > >Yes certainly that's fine, that's expected for local installations, and >users can specify a prefix with the upstream's makefile if they want to >install somewhere else. In my local test, if I run `make install_lib` to install the libbpf.so to /usr/local/lib64, `-lbpf` specified in af_xdp pmd still fails to find the library, the build would end up with a lot of undefined references which are defined in libbpf. It means during dpdk compilation, it won't search libraries in /usr/local/lib*, right? Install the libbpf to /usr/lib64 via `make install_lib prefix=/usr` doesn't have this issue, so shall I just document it in af_xdp.rst or there is other proper way to do it? Thanks, Xiaolong > >-- >Kind regards, >Luca Boccassi