Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 19/20] net/sfc: support flow action COUNT in transfer rules

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

02/07/2021 14:53, Andrew Rybchenko:
> On 7/2/21 3:30 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 02/07/2021 10:43, Andrew Rybchenko:
> >> On 7/1/21 4:05 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> >>> On 7/1/21 3:34 PM, David Marchand wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 11:22 AM Andrew Rybchenko
> >>>> <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru> wrote:
> >>>>> The build works fine for me on FC34, but it has
> >>>>> libatomic-11.1.1-3.fc34.x86_64 installed.
> >>>>
> >>>> I first produced the issue on my "old" FC32.
> >>>> Afaics, for FC33 and later, gcc now depends on libatomic and the
> >>>> problem won't be noticed.
> >>>> FC32 and before are EOL, but I then reproduced the issue on RHEL 8
> >>>> (and Intel CI reported it on Centos 8 too).
> >>>
> >>> I see. Thanks for the clarification.
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd like to understand what we're trying to solve here.
> >>>>> Are we trying to make meson to report the missing library
> >>>>> correctly?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If so, I think I can do simple check using cc.links()
> >>>>> which will fail if the library is not found. I'll
> >>>>> test that it works as expected if the library is not
> >>>>> completely installed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I tried below diff, and it works for me.
> >>>> "works" as in net/sfc gets disabled without libatomic installed:
> > [...]
> >>>>  # for gcc compiles we need -latomic for 128-bit atomic ops
> >>>>  if cc.get_id() == 'gcc'
> >>>> +    code = '''#include <stdio.h>
> >>>> +    void main() { printf("Atomilink me.\n"); }
> >>>> +    '''
> >>>> +    if not cc.links(code, args: '-latomic', name: 'libatomic link check')
> >>>> +        build = false
> >>>> +        reason = 'missing dependency, "libatomic"'
> >>>> +        subdir_done()
> >>>> +    endif
> >>>>      ext_deps += cc.find_library('atomic')
> >>>>  endif
> >>>
> >>> Many thanks, LGTM. I'll pick it up and add comments why
> >>> it is checked this way.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I've send v4 with the problem fixed. However, I'm afraid
> >> build test systems should be updated to have libatomic
> >> correctly installed. Otherwise, they do not really check
> >> net/sfc build.
> > 
> > When testing on old systems, sfc won't be tested anymore after this patchset.
> > On recent systems, sfc should be enabled I guess.
> > I don't see how to manage better, sorry.
> > 
> 
> I see. I thought that it is possible to install missing
> package on corresponding systems to make build coverage
> better.
> 
> Now I automatically test build on problematic distros
> with previously missing packages installed. So I have
> internal build coverage anyway.

David asked for installing libatomic:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/ci/CAJFAV8xCNBL4yEZU0c=dJGYS+13QM7Uz7e2qnUkMuM7eaKKw+Q@mail.gmail.com/

We should wait for it to be installed otherwise ABI check will fail.