From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE26DE0 for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 08:11:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Dec 2014 23:11:02 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,499,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="641176170" Received: from pgsmsx103.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.82]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Dec 2014 23:11:01 -0800 Received: from shsmsx103.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.110.14) by PGSMSX103.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.82) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 15:11:00 +0800 Received: from shsmsx101.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.110]) by SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.240]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 15:10:59 +0800 From: "Qiu, Michael" To: Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] enicpmd: compilation error during inclusion of vfio.h Thread-Index: AQHQCmXcD1kyoaMpW0moBIYzz5u9IQ== Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 07:10:58 +0000 Message-ID: <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9BEF5@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1417108480-28341-1-git-send-email-ssujith@cisco.com> <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9B11F@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <2664831.CNeh3do0yF@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] enicpmd: compilation error during inclusion of vfio.h X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 07:11:04 -0000 On 11/28/2014 10:22 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:=0A= > 2014-11-28 02:09, Qiu, Michael:=0A= >> I have no comments on this issue, but I indeed see many places do have= =0A= >> this kernel issue(before/now/future), so can solve this issue globally?= =0A= >>=0A= >> Thus, we do not need to fix this case by case.=0A= >>=0A= >> One solution(not sure if it works or not):=0A= >>=0A= >> 1. features and kernel version required list.=0A= >> 2. When config DPDK before build, automatically check this list and if= =0A= >> not mach, just disable this feature in config file even though user set= =0A= >> it manually.=0A= >>=0A= >> Thus main code may not need to change.=0A= >>=0A= >> Does this works?=0A= > If configuration system was different, we could have a list of constraint= =0A= > to satisfy before enabling a feature.=0A= =0A= Yes, I thinks so.=0A= =0A= BTW, Is this valuable to spend time on, or can become one feature?=0A= =0A= If so, I would like to have some time to do some research on it.=0A= =0A= Thanks,=0A= Michael=0A= >=0A= =0A=