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 884E9A0527; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 15:03:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3B95B30; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 15:03:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com (new1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.221]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A722E5AB3 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 15:02:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B9158059E; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:02:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 09:02:57 -0500 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=fm2; bh= eFn55yB8Ayhf9QWLU1Clqzoqeqgm7DTA+2DDRTNqwVw=; b=pnBOtLyh7Z91y0Sr iTU9CwbQumcbEzwnQKBTItO4So++uf95aEFfqPYDgq6r+9/tOXvJIptZMNPqphuZ DIwqx0eUC7ZYz5kqwYtDBWVhnoqUk1usEB5Rrl5UalkYGNRuGd2vRzgaZsYvMWm+ uFFXwwMlEfKI6fM8AixDCBUW43xqmMtEVh2qUGVf1uBYmq5y+9FOFX5k9AW7Rkp+ egQHV203dFeX/DZK4fuiuNdXFI/AlwZoMKdiPtifClpH9JPGP+OGifeMPw3S9avt 0yHDbJ10A3TTasq5lg+cM2bGS6AmZmEo5S5WdRkjh/eE39v4c6kZPsDqA8asTawW LJ/jAQ== 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=fm1; bh=eFn55yB8Ayhf9QWLU1Clqzoqeqgm7DTA+2DDRTNqw Vw=; b=rho95YdEBH5qlz8Tq/ZdpXX3bXvy4EBaH3B6GIO8A0Wm/hKP2nco1sAur bccmB4i3O1O9I9O9X1G2uw1S2bZkQTPvpE98VRSnG0zD3AYSzCzIdeTuh8wL921p rRZXYZm3Pp/MEQfGRnq6tkBo8d3wlWCJK+nvQpcH/Rdcom284p14XYhuetHLrqlG 2eaOne0BGPK6oHcTsYCLvM/dPT2poVU1y5tudvYYyr25Z/5IY5HnYsp97UyuFJHA r85O9appCCxoJu4ymGcj+e+gxKzwZFBWDHlMqnlcKZHql7ogEvUtLWZ0oGBBdB4O g+TpRuekryu2EaNcPWJbo/MY1N5Uw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudduhedgieduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght 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 D340A3063085; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:02:53 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob Cc: Bruce Richardson , dpdk-dev , David Marchand , Ferruh Yigit , Olivier Matz , Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Andrew Rybchenko , Viacheslav Ovsiienko , Ajit Khaparde , Jerin Jacob , Hemant Agrawal , Ray Kinsella , Neil Horman , Nithin Dabilpuram , Kiran Kumar K Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 15:02:52 +0100 Message-ID: <2407553.B4KgyuXQMY@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20201107155306.463148-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <2304322.cEvxdTIR8G@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] mbuf: move pool pointer in first half 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" 09/11/2020 14:35, Jerin Jacob: > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 6:29 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > 09/11/2020 13:01, Jerin Jacob: > > > Hi @Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > Any specific reason why you removed the static assert from octeontx2. > > > > I have a build failure when cross-compiling for octeontx2. I was wrong here. > I am trying the below command, I am not able to see any issue > meson build --cross-file config/arm/arm64_octeontx2_linux_gcc > > Are you facing the issue with 32bit? Could you share the steps to > reproduce and gcc version? Oh you're right, the issue was with 32-bit build, sorry for the confusion. > --- a/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c > +++ b/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c > @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ nix_tx_offload_flags(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev) > RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pkt_len) != > offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, ol_flags) + 12); > RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, tx_offload) != > - offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + 2 * sizeof(void *)); > + offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + 2 * sizeof(uint64_t)); The actual "fix" is offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + sizeof(uint64_t) + sizeof(void *) I don't understand the octeontx2 vector code. Please check what is the impact of this offset change. BTW, is 32-bit build really supported with octeontx2?