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 B70B6A0679 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 14:18:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B5CB1B3BA; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 14:18:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F9501B3B6 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 14:18:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E297226AD; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 08:18:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 04 Apr 2019 08:18:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=5hwKNYgUSrW1DCvfvrjINN5Wd3X9nnwap+rA0y/lvJY=; b=KiO2EI2ZWD42 dNt3IHZhHTTNTlXgFfL0tkULp2mGGsoI9cJOUAHAkONDbWWBU8sylH20lS3A8ZZq GhknsPi9tcfsnP2/FBIwa4ifinvUF0y/h6TRDNr3jddBqBvU8IaOwiSBRpSEciYY URAO2cgScrkhttbMKubjSUeJf7ezS6s= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=5hwKNYgUSrW1DCvfvrjINN5Wd3X9nnwap+rA0y/lv JY=; b=YExpVGooADDlpyb2cQaWtqtUPUmc9MyDmAVlhMvU322ZSX7V9K2+Dac8N BI3xbkyy7rGMgHguW0sR2+WzTEoOTKfGk2fIA8/AUOqAaUJOWiyrLQEM4791C0iW 31hbXNJZJxIAEr9/eYgYtbvj2xlmvRJ4pK7qmEyFOvRzlBqCP1Kx74mAJZ8mCVjl rSIKyjkzGDfi1Wj1abLGoJuoB33qP56xgejc6/rxLZ/M83CaGdnHPPgvheNDtsjG nF9b25kmEZ7O2veYTjDh1pwJcGJ2aQDoouJ8TY97gZLz4F5gTwKD+oUXdaYoSXoC EyBVyVe1bC2WSHwdPv82/uDujJqlg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrtdehgdehtdculddtuddrgedutddrtddtmd cutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdp uffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivg hnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthhqredttddtjeen ucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrg hlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecukfhppeejjedr udefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghsse hmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1F39E10316; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 08:18:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Eads, Gage" , "Yigit, Ferruh" Cc: Shahaf Shuler , Matan Azrad , Yongseok Koh , "dev@dpdk.org" , "olivier.matz@6wind.com" , "arybchenko@solarflare.com" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "gavin.hu@arm.com" , "Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com" , "nd@arm.com" , "chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "jerinj@marvell.com" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 14:18:02 +0200 Message-ID: <2748440.W4LoRDhJ5f@xps> In-Reply-To: <9184057F7FC11744A2107296B6B8EB1E54210CC8@FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <20190403193541.28044-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <3359378.XCyAA4UgPl@xps> <9184057F7FC11744A2107296B6B8EB1E54210CC8@FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] eal/x86: add 128-bit atomic compare exchange 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: <20190404121802.hSosks7sGTDmxoe0jmkXsTJPQ3Q1N125uY7j1xj-KeY@z> 04/04/2019 14:14, Eads, Gage: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 04/04/2019 14:08, Thomas Monjalon: > > > 04/04/2019 13:47, Ferruh Yigit: > > > > .../dpdk/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/include/rte_atomic_64.h:223:3: > > > > error: ISO C does not support =E2=80=98__int128=E2=80=99 types [-We= rror=3Dpedantic] > > > > > > We can try this kind of workaround (disable pedantic locally): > > > > > https://github.com/HowardHinnant/date/pull/38/commits/177032852d5b46 > > 14 > > > 112ca1ab3ef42d6b41824816 > >=20 > > Or better: > > __extension__ typedef __int128 int128; > >=20 >=20 > Taking that one step further -- RTE_STD_C11 evaluates to __extension__ (w= hen the STD C version is sufficiently old). I don't think __int128 is part of C11. Is it? =46erruh, I cannot reproduce the compiler error. What is your compiler? Please, could you test this patch? =2D-- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/x86/rte_atomic_64.h +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/x86/rte_atomic_64.h @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ typedef struct { RTE_STD_C11 union { uint64_t val[2]; =2D __int128 int128; + __extension__ __int128 int128; }; } __rte_aligned(16) rte_int128_t;