From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 455EE56AB for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:13:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Jun 2016 11:13:16 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,537,1459839600"; d="scan'208";a="1010645297" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.17]) ([10.237.221.17]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Jun 2016 11:13:15 -0700 To: "Damjan Marion (damarion)" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <9A518F3E-04B9-4E40-BDDE-B16433A21BF9@cisco.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <57716CBB.8050609@intel.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 19:13:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9A518F3E-04B9-4E40-BDDE-B16433A21BF9@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] weak functions in some drivers 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: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 18:13:17 -0000 On 6/21/2016 4:01 PM, Damjan Marion (damarion) wrote: > > Hello, > ... > > What is not clear to me is motivation to use weak here instead of simply using CONFIG_RTE_I40E_INC_VECTOR > macro to exclude stubs in i40e_rxtx.c. It will make library smaller and avoid issues like this one > which are quite hard to troubleshoot. Since this issue seen in fd.io, I didn't investigated more, but I don't want to clock your valid question, this is an attempt to resurrect the question ... > > BTW Looks like same issue is happening with fm10k driver. >