From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81BDA04B5; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 11:19:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA7C32BD5; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 11:19:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A2A100C for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 11:19:18 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: +cVCu+zPM5FMjdfLmPbg32z2AQ1/917V5gojn3SZC1QCpCWn6IfZIluf6VjH63Yf0OYoouMAX9 Lzg7Dpcg72Uw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9786"; a="164556505" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,423,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="164556505" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Oct 2020 03:19:16 -0700 IronPort-SDR: +5yITS50jcbaE2hS0khtxWRqakCiUuNeJB1CB/ujNP1Q3cK7bWpzoi/yB1w2f8s7WeDl/6bPkz wcDLDj/tHO6Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,423,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="468245644" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.214.252.158]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 27 Oct 2020 03:19:13 -0700 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 10:19:08 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: David Marchand Cc: "Rong, Leyi" , "Zhang, Qi Z" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , dev , Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20201027101908.GA936@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20200910065504.104217-1-leyi.rong@intel.com> <20201023041407.20442-1-leyi.rong@intel.com> <20201023041407.20442-2-leyi.rong@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] net/ice: add AVX512 vector path 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" On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 09:09:31AM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 8:13 AM Rong, Leyi wrote: > > Would prefer using __AVX512F__ instead of RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_AVX512F here rather than remove the RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_ macro directly to check the CPU capability. > > So the judgment statement will be > > if cc.get_define('__AVX512F__', args: machine_args) != '' or (not machine_args.contains('-mno-avx512f') and cc.has_argument('-mavx512f')) > > > > what do you think? > > No opinion as I have yet to understand the subtleties to control > enablement of avx stuff. > Bruce? > The above proposal is correct, in that we now check the compiler flags directly rather than using our own custom flags. /Bruce