From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BCFD58E4 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:27:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Mar 2015 01:24:22 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,373,1422950400"; d="scan'208";a="465052697" Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.3]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Mar 2015 01:20:28 -0700 Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.247]) by IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.218]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:27:10 +0000 From: "Mcnamara, John" To: "Qiu, Michael" , "Kavanagh, Mark B" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Panu Matilainen Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy.h: additional cflags required with OVS Thread-Index: AdBah3Gj040QJ0mYRHia+o7JqLV4XgAhDHWQ Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:27:09 +0000 Message-ID: References: <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286CFDC65@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286CFDC65@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy.h: additional cflags required with OVS 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, 10 Mar 2015 08:27:13 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Qiu, Michael > Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 3:05 AM > To: Kavanagh, Mark B; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_memcpy.h: additional cflags required with OVS >=20 =20 > What's your gcc version? this should be an issue with old version gcc, an= d > I'm working on this to solve this issue now. Hi Michael, I see the issue with gcc 4.7.2 but not with 4.9.2. John