DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
To: "Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" <Gavin.Hu@arm.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>, "thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	"jerinj@marvell.com" <jerinj@marvell.com>,
	"hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
	"Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)" <Gavin.Hu@arm.com>,
	"olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
	"bruce.richardson@intel.com" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] eal: fix clang compilation error on x86
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 17:42:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AM6PR08MB367275C91A324BBBF41CE90498810@AM6PR08MB3672.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1547548354-44671-2-git-send-email-gavin.hu@arm.com>

> 
> From: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
> 
> When CONFIG_RTE_FORCE_INTRINSICS is enabled for x86, the clang
> compilation error was:
> 	include/generic/rte_atomic.h:215:9: error:
> 		implicit declaration of function '__atomic_exchange_2'
> 		is invalid in C99
> 	include/generic/rte_atomic.h:494:9: error:
> 		implicit declaration of function '__atomic_exchange_4'
> 		is invalid in C99
> 	include/generic/rte_atomic.h:772:9: error:
> 		implicit declaration of function '__atomic_exchange_8'
> 		is invalid in C99
> 
> Use __atomic_exchange_n instead of __atomic_exchange_(2/4/8).
> For more information, please refer to:
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2018-April/096776.html
> 
> Fixes: 7bdccb93078e ("eal: fix ARM build with clang")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
> Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_atomic.h | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> index b99ba46..ed5b125 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_atomic.h
> @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ rte_atomic16_exchange(volatile uint16_t *dst,
> uint16_t val);  static inline uint16_t  rte_atomic16_exchange(volatile
> uint16_t *dst, uint16_t val)  { -#if defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM64) &&
> defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_CLANG)
> +#if defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_CLANG)
Please check http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-January/123331.html
This needs to be changed to (__clang__). This applies for other similar changes here.

>  	return __atomic_exchange_n(dst, val, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);  #else
>  	return __atomic_exchange_2(dst, val, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); @@ -
> 495,7 +495,7 @@ rte_atomic32_exchange(volatile uint32_t *dst, uint32_t
> val);  static inline uint32_t  rte_atomic32_exchange(volatile uint32_t *dst,
> uint32_t val)  { -#if defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM64) &&
> defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_CLANG)
> +#if defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_CLANG)
>  	return __atomic_exchange_n(dst, val, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);  #else
>  	return __atomic_exchange_4(dst, val, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); @@ -
> 777,7 +777,7 @@ rte_atomic64_exchange(volatile uint64_t *dst, uint64_t
> val);  static inline uint64_t  rte_atomic64_exchange(volatile uint64_t *dst,
> uint64_t val)  { -#if defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM64) &&
> defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_CLANG)
> +#if defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_CLANG)
>  	return __atomic_exchange_n(dst, val, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);  #else
>  	return __atomic_exchange_8(dst, val, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
> --
> 2.7.4

  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-15 17:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-20 10:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/5] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/5] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct spinlock benchmarking Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/5] test/spinlock: get timestamp more precisely Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 3/5] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 4/5] spinlock: move the implementation to arm specific file Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 12:47   ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 12:55     ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 14:40       ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2018-12-20 14:36     ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2018-12-20 15:09       ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 15:58         ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2018-12-20 15:59           ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 5/5] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/5] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/5] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/5] test/spinlock: get timestamp more precisely Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/5] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/5] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] eal: fix clang compilation error on x86 Gavin Hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/4] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] eal: fix clang compilation error on x86 gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] eal: fix clang compilation error on x86 gavin hu
2019-01-15 17:42   ` Honnappa Nagarahalli [this message]
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/4] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/4] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/4] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins gavin hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/3] generic spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/3] test/spinlock: dealy 1 us to create contention Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/3] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/3] generic spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/3] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/3] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/3] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/3] generic spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2019-03-11 12:21   ` Nipun Gupta
2019-03-15 12:21   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-03-15 12:21     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-03-28  7:47   ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-28  7:47     ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-08  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/3] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/3] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 3/3] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2019-03-12 14:53   ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-03-14  0:31     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-03-14  0:31       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-03-14  2:36       ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2019-03-14  2:36         ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2019-03-14 14:22   ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-03-14 14:22     ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=AM6PR08MB367275C91A324BBBF41CE90498810@AM6PR08MB3672.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=Gavin.Hu@arm.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=stable@dpdk.org \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).