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 3729EA0548; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 16:59:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F0340FAE; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 16:59:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1157740F1A for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 16:59:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD9B75C0226; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 10:59:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 15 Jun 2022 10:59:54 -0400 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=fm2; t=1655305194; x= 1655391594; bh=4z3RgVYvNTGFyYiPuBfsHDTdFDFtz6z/1TKBnwFkUUU=; b=a xFmMjNNXa778VEw8ifMh0v5eSeiK5YiHfgltsYNE4soj5aJAEhzYIUAMuzogEYTi ShX8VjQdfUm3UGGT+qsAIjp9jhKK5HxtssH3gUTIJOguqSYgzc0xICv9BplBKBoI jkoIgUFt/i2ViyYOd95cHZLmfV07VgNRXx2o8436dKlIub1XFKCGPyH1cjN2ZLCg NTZ+K3eKzk+AyziWNUmC1H4yfQV9zM+Kxt8XqdlH38wKNxaKYnUTnn9jVEFi4+CP Pe4fdCQfL3QLYFh9VQHLLBc9fL6EqQN2RacJaiHf/8jG4J9qKs9K/oRnfYmA5WAN Es9FkphhryTDoEFPanRhg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id: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; t=1655305194; x= 1655391594; bh=4z3RgVYvNTGFyYiPuBfsHDTdFDFtz6z/1TKBnwFkUUU=; b=A 2JOHzsUNjuvXR73jdY9C7Tg2Pvrk31KNnG2ioJd/irTeGXeezqYdJY39t03pyO+y nMHn+IAEg2TuT4TNQgwWz6/xrHBXu7vGh/qYweygzAchvJOE8U8Zqp0Ihyb64UId w6a1S/pmBVTbEvLNZF/YCX3loji4Zrwh6g2v5Cd/m7h0ISHj+RB/WxWizF5bVXZa y9uVEBBCPM12PRJ2LGPnA5dTR1xxai71mw2KcUlEAhF3Ptt9rp1svktQB+etvhQO GhLibr/8gwSs5HkTFrLm93tRo2rPLAJqV/2AcKzeLAYbRTQJOeXAtzCaEyVVrsyd oXlSHib6BaPtA6NA5g8vQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedruddvuddgkedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 10:59:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: David Marchand , dev , Ferruh Yigit , Bruce Richardson , Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= , Konstantin Ananyev Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] Fix compilation with gcc 12 Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 16:59:51 +0200 Message-ID: <3938784.mvXUDI8C0e@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20220615074506.464109f6@hermes.local> References: <20220518101657.1230416-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20220615074506.464109f6@hermes.local> 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 15/06/2022 16:45, Stephen Hemminger: > On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 10:49:17 +0200 > David Marchand wrote: > > > On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 12:17 PM David Marchand > > wrote: > > > > > > Fedora 36 is out since early may and comes with gcc 12. > > > This series fixes compilation or waives some checks. > > > > > > There might be something fishy with rte_memcpy on x86 but, for now, > > > the rte_memcpy related fixes are on the caller side. > > > > > > Some "base" drivers have issues, I chose the simple solution of waiving > > > the checks for them. > > > > > > Compilation is the only thing checked. > > > Please driver maintainers, check nothing got broken. > > > > I applied the patches that got acked and that had no objection or > > comment from maintainers (i.e. patch 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11). > > I also cleaned the mess in bugzilla where we had multiple reports of > > the same issues, or stale bugs that I can't reproduce with released > > gcc 12. > > > > I'll respin separately the patches for which I have clear comments, > > and drop my patches waiving the compiler checks. > > > > We still need to agree on the best approach to handle the new checks. > > We have two rfc series from Stephen, how do we move forward? > > Lets fix all the bugs and remove any workarounds using pragma's. > > Some of them may mean removing rte_memcpy where it is not needed. What about your series Stephen? Please would you like to respin?