From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33939A00C5; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:19:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBA364068C; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:19:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5612D4067E for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:19:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0254A5C01FE; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 06:19:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 14 Feb 2022 06:19:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; bh=fPVcSeFVxEMZXv 2KNAaTy83G0oAq6t45eSIcaKbroe8=; b=islyEWi0tFjU2sVgxCamE41S/DepPj nbC5zb0wSUJ0MK7hJ+LIoonhmp8xwLJdwsmrYKwSiGoH8d9BR+4erRqOEZZ3beJe q0pAW+D/0ZNGMhcd5f5Hvqtt2n3ajSl3fyvi+kUOMnSdi/U8Z2PFInpBptCS/FG7 ryfy5MYfrlU87o9Oby6DuVXTmPLGVNQ+G37br90MX4O72eohXfzcYtc5x6AXkGP7 gh0oXodOaqcn1qjJXMuSAafKvJizBZfby9kvwrMMGoybTUyJXoff+ETwEsKkf554 DTnkKZXjXrp2qKyD27Qr1dC+kYg3w13aq/8efafbq3jM3Fc34/yRyWFA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=fPVcSeFVxEMZXv2KNAaTy83G0oAq6t45eSIcaKbro e8=; b=QKULntvgCJCQxw+t+oUYS+GEsKOTqq9Tbr2bjVFeAGZz/gmiwwFs8+ccG SlWi+QpDbsjRw6dZtj+LziyFzyHNX8GPswdmnw0XKmwYN9GoZ5WmQO8yF1M+VG9O CMGNnE01Qi2bB0Q72Ob1GpwcMS8n/hoCrOod3/mRwAG5O0gjswq2WBtrweT9NuGB OZSZyzQBwkA4BxFBG3oI1Rkhg81wtkMkaX+IbRDAFw6yhcBPdiyU5PFGFv0irV0k ADLAA20T9mWMy08UV90p1OSLova5RAMXSs4x6V9fUXm/vYVOc1RY2dM5f6mhFjjS ZFNTOv3nRpmstDz0/Tz0Laet6/X3w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddrjedvgddvvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdejueei iedvffegheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 06:19:25 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Tyler Retzlaff , dev@dpdk.org, ocardona@microsoft.com, roretzla@microsoft.com, david.marchand@redhat.com, ferruh.yigit@intel.com Subject: Re: out of tree driver builds broken with C++ Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:19:24 +0100 Message-ID: <3617079.VQhiAETyHQ@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20220214091350.GA2793@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <3450334.eFTFzoEnKi@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 14/02/2022 11:45, Bruce Richardson: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:22:08AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 14/02/2022 10:13, Tyler Retzlaff: > > > while the driver api is "internal" we agreed some time ago that drivers > > > could be built external to the dpdk tree. by enabling the meson setup > > > option -Denable_driver_sdk=true. > > > > > > it was agreed that the driver api was internal and would attract no > > > binary compatibility support which was fine. this change has now > > > imposed a further restriction that out of tree drivers have to be > > > authored in C only as non-C++ compatible code will invariably leak into > > > the internal structures. > > > > > > you won't allow us to build C++ drivers in the dpdk tree and it seems > > > now you are preventing building of C++ drivers outside of the tree too. > > > > That's the problem of non-written assumptions, they are unknown or forgotten. > > Did we agree to support out-of-tree drivers in C++? > > > > We really need to make things clear and written in documentation. > > > > > could we please re-evaluate this. > > > > Yes we can re-evaluate. > > What is the list of impacted files? > > > Hacking meson files a bit, the list of SDK header files is reported as below. > > /Bruce > > Message: SDK headers: > Message: ethdev_driver.h > Message: ethdev_pci.h > Message: ethdev_vdev.h > Message: cryptodev_pmd.h > Message: eventdev_pmd.h > Message: eventdev_pmd_pci.h > Message: eventdev_pmd_vdev.h > Message: eventdev_trace.h > Message: event_timer_adapter_pmd.h > Message: rte_dmadev_pmd.h > Message: vdpa_driver.h I see no harm in supporting C++ include of these headers. Any objection? Could we have a test in chkincs for the SDK headers?