From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E59EA034F;
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 02:02:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1651A140DA2;
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 02:02:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com (szxga05-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.191])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9558D4069C
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 02:02:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from DGGEMS409-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58])
by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4F3bks4bm6zwPGR;
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 09:00:05 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.67.103.128] (10.67.103.128) by
DGGEMS409-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.209) with Microsoft SMTP Server id
14.3.498.0; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 09:01:53 +0800
To: oulijun <oulijun@huawei.com>, =?UTF-8?Q?Juraj_Linke=c5=a1?=
<juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
CC: "ferruh.yigit@intel.com" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org"
<dev@dpdk.org>, "linuxarm@openeuler.org" <linuxarm@openeuler.org>
References: <1612356396-21309-1-git-send-email-oulijun@huawei.com>
<5435054.rFV2aVPxyo@thomas> <b1c3bd89176540bda82940c1080019b7@pantheon.tech>
<2613370.aJkOJV8Rtk@thomas> <6c3db7beccb34c249a3e08996f82d51e@pantheon.tech>
<c28cce6c-8842-e410-c7c5-70db142d9b20@huawei.com>
From: "Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <9773e49d-a374-ca25-7e46-ce51debb7f9a@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 09:01:53 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c28cce6c-8842-e410-c7c5-70db142d9b20@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.67.103.128]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: fix Hisilicon kunpeng920 SoC
build
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Hi, all,
any comments for this patch?
Hope for your reply.
Thanks.
在 2021/3/5 9:36, oulijun 写道:
>
>
> 在 2021/3/1 18:46, Juraj Linkeš 写道:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 1:10 PM
>>> To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>>> Cc: oulijun <oulijun@huawei.com>; ferruh.yigit@intel.com; dev@dpdk.org;
>>> linuxarm@openeuler.org
>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: fix Hisilicon
>>> kunpeng920 SoC
>>> build
>>>
>>> 24/02/2021 12:55, Juraj Linkeš:
>>>> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
>>>>> 24/02/2021 02:34, oulijun:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 在 2021/2/10 17:41, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
>>>>>>> 03/02/2021 13:46, Lijun Ou:
>>>>>>>> From: Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because of the '9ca2f16' have merged, the current hns3 pmd
>>>>>>>> driver can not be directly complied on the kunpeng920 server board.
>>>>>>>> Therefore, we need to fix the meson build.
>>>>>>>> Besides, add kunpeng 920 SoC meson cross compile target.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fixes: 9ca2f16faa7f ("config/arm: isolate generic build")
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why do you think this patch is fixing the one above?
>>>>>>> It looks just a new config, not a fix. Am I missing something?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sorry to see you so late. In the meantime, we are celebrating
>>>>>> the Spring Festival. This patch fixes the problem. If the patch is
>>>>>> not added, the latest version cannot be directly compiled on the
>>>>>> Kunpeng
>>>>>> 930 server board.In addition, the cross compilation configuration
>>>>>> file is
>>> added.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please can you explain what was removed which breaks your compilation?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can explain what's changed and why we changed it.
>>>>
>>>> The previous behavior was that when an uknown implementer was found
>>> (when we're building on an uknown build machine) we fell back to a
>>> generic
>>> build.
>>>> The current behavior is we raise an error when building on an
>>>> unknown build
>>> machine and inform the user about the generic build (there's an error
>>> in the
>>> message, it should be -Dmachine=default instead of
>>> -Dmachine=generic). Lijun
>>> came across this scenario, so he wants to add an implementer, but it
>>> is not a fix,
>>> rather an addition that we wanted to encourage when we changed the
>>> behavior. The change in behavior also has an additional benefit in
>>> that it notifies
>>> the user that meson is not doing a tailored build for the build
>>> machine and the
>>> only permissible build is the generic one.
>>>
>>> There were already many fixes for that rework.
>>> Please check if there are other missing updates.
>>>
>>
>> This is actually the first mistake that my testing missed. I tested
>> that the message is properly emitted, but I didn't test the message
>> after we extracted the default->generic rename patch. As a side note,
>> we could address this issue with
>> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1613657555-17683-1-git-send-email-juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech/
>> - then we can leave the message in place as is (with -Dmachine=generic).
>>
>> I went through all of the patches again but I didn't find anything
>> that needs addressing.
>>
>> As far as I'm aware, there were two other fixes for the series. One
>> was a failure of communication (the native margs fix - I implemented
>> what we thought we agreed on) and the other is not really a fix, just
>> the addition of one implementer configuration (I removed the
>> implementer because we didn't have its configuration). The clang
>> cross-compile fixes are related, but those are the problem with that
>> series, not the rework series.
>>
> Hi,
> the patch
> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/1613657555-17683-1-git-send-email-juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech/
>
> will this patch be incorporated? We have realized this problem and fixed
> it in the internal version.
>>>
>>>
>>
> .