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 0F8FAA0A05; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:18:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CED5A140E08; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:18:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35154140D21 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:18:56 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: xqSQhY67gyWrZQMgeOclI8NYYC8rLEd7Bs5U9usGUOcrgRbWuCQmg9CUcvSxB0ISdPDRJ9WxV8 NpmS6IhXVsPg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9869"; a="243142946" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,360,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="243142946" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jan 2021 01:18:55 -0800 IronPort-SDR: 4/eqjTDUKa4T7dOhDIS2toTzfKe6NiP/6V5GhbdnVlDHyYJNra/WM7AxZYXTUgQeHPJOnEipQB r6NubcWlCbCA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,360,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="384752535" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.196.24]) ([10.213.196.24]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jan 2021 01:18:51 -0800 To: David Marchand , Tal Shnaiderman Cc: Ali Alnubani , Odi Assli , "Rong, Leyi" , "Zhang, Qi Z" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Xing, Beilei" , "Kadam, Pallavi" , "Menon, Ranjit" , "dev@dpdk.org" , NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon , Raslan Darawsheh References: <20201215021945.103396-1-leyi.rong@intel.com> <20210114063951.2580-1-leyi.rong@intel.com> <2f4e5455-2c11-9f90-fc8e-ac5d1601536e@intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <5c867466-01ba-bfed-b489-9112cb186550@intel.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 09:18:48 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] AVX512 vPMD on i40e 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 Sender: "dev" On 1/20/2021 8:36 AM, David Marchand wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 7:26 AM Tal Shnaiderman wrote: >>> The patch "add AVX512 vector path" also caused a build failure when cross >>> compiling on Linux using mingw, and it's still reproducing in next-net >>> (517969c95). >>> >>> ``` >>> $ meson --werror --buildtype=debugoptimized --cross-file config/x86/cross- >>> mingw -Dexamples=helloworld build && ninja-build -C build -j32 >>> >>> [221/232] Generating symbol file lib/librte_mbuf-21.dll.p/librte_mbuf- >>> 21.dll.symbols >>> [222/232] Generating symbol file lib/librte_hash-21.dll.p/librte_hash- >>> 21.dll.symbols >>> [223/232] Linking target lib/librte_net-21.dll [224/232] Compiling C object >>> drivers/net/i40e/libi40e_avx512_lib.a.p/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx512.c.obj >>> FAILED: drivers/net/i40e/libi40e_avx512_lib.a.p/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx512.c.obj >>> ... >>> drivers/net/i40e/libi40e_avx512_lib.a.p/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx512.c.obj.d -o >>> drivers/net/i40e/libi40e_avx512_lib.a.p/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx512.c.obj -c >>> ../../root/dpdk/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx512.c >>> {standard input}: Assembler messages: >>> {standard input}:112: Error: invalid register for .seh_savexmm {standard >>> input}:114: Error: invalid register for .seh_savexmm ... >>> ... >>> {standard input}:25351: Error: invalid register for .seh_savexmm {standard >>> input}:25352: Error: invalid register for .seh_savexmm [225/232] Generating >>> symbol file lib/librte_net-21.dll.p/librte_net-21.dll.symbols >>> ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed. >>> ``` >>> >>> OS: Fedora 32 >>> Meson: 0.55.3 >>> MinGW: Fedora MinGW 9.2.1-6.fc32 >>> >>> - Ali >> >> Those errors were detected in the CI tests for this patch [1], we should pay more attention to those now that 2 PMDs are supported on Windows. >> >> [1]: https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/patchsets/15164/ > > I won't grmbl about how CI reports are not being looked at (or maybe I > just did :)). > Noted and agreed, I will be more careful next time for next-net.