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 5C2C245562; Wed, 3 Jul 2024 16:22:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67414279C; Wed, 3 Jul 2024 16:22:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB666410FA for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2024 16:22:22 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1720016542; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=FggFZ+TSURN5wxC1hxmo0S6e/Vs3rvDe7kzt3EOEEbs=; b=Vcc1ldaNRZJmrjZ0XKcmNzi88VTzaOJ96595EZNd3g7abFOsgZALQnsOBwOB5dlvUFvPxY qCd5Z1q4Jms2XBy8Fuf0IVsz6m+Sh6NiPkpCIBVwu3vPzNKIg6eUECnCyGpTevnRZEZkt3 9gUnCr6t9s0xHLKvgCfJ5cVcXxUP+0Y= Received: from mail-lj1-f199.google.com (mail-lj1-f199.google.com [209.85.208.199]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-362-tH2RJFluNnyFl5leEy9UEw-1; Wed, 03 Jul 2024 10:22:20 -0400 X-MC-Unique: tH2RJFluNnyFl5leEy9UEw-1 Received: by mail-lj1-f199.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2ee87069f27so6015451fa.2 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2024 07:22:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720016539; x=1720621339; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=FggFZ+TSURN5wxC1hxmo0S6e/Vs3rvDe7kzt3EOEEbs=; b=JhmcKMDwn0/eveiXQiv9tLxP3advGvIABwm3aJ89gW/jYY1sDYBwk29cr5JR90t7wx jkvbMBqk1qSlcYnlYhetv4ijgBSk94AMkYFqDxPgqXN/cd5CdVAX20yv9PwPe2CoxITY gdHicHnUd59OhZPw2tDp+dx7WmB7b4qcndXbO0LekL4ZYpONh8A9PRwzlFiNImQnDq1b Bvygvej5nZygcTsyW+xjMxrD3dOcFK5SO+GuHKdRe0cODZ3UoVO3msjLaHPdRQbAmAaZ 70Lxguj9Dxbo/P/Y9R1Cex7sRYiAd+n4iUP6q7OiFXDdwI3S7StO1Lv9uhtXcPKPOEed /+TA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX12BHlSrNTJSlBC7xbyIw0ZAH+1rgQl9xDMNxwj+pK2oiPPMcn1dBcvBzRL3eXKIeqWK6dWbhRCTJj9zY= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwpUXqnYYiG68cV4T0Kqck2Mu/etvwNSSX2USvIv5pF8OGqw3DZ tbjwBQtf3Uau1pyNi0e39j+h+O6tekYtGj7zqZb23DJ419cMmfmJX+/S/hzqFnAfit6szZ7YIk/ GpPPgKkMP7V/0RauRfRuZb5FjJT0PuTLHmtzbLIsfCaIBDJ6CvUuYIpJC6E9hO+eO/GMDSb/iLC 2UkLc8M1qzCOdwOTQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1551:b0:2ee:80b2:1e99 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2ee80b2258fmr22372991fa.44.1720016539033; Wed, 03 Jul 2024 07:22:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH1QrG8AAjHM6wNZv+H6US1VdCFbxK6MQviBHm1Y9BSgW/mwJkvXRow/7i9XxulLdce7w0ptSEc3pWrxjbbGqI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1551:b0:2ee:80b2:1e99 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2ee80b2258fmr22372751fa.44.1720016538656; Wed, 03 Jul 2024 07:22:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1710970416-27841-1-git-send-email-roretzla@linux.microsoft.com> <4023574.2iPT33SAM4@thomas> <2845507.vgeOAicOrc@thomas> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F594@smartserver.smartshare.dk> In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F594@smartserver.smartshare.dk> From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 16:22:06 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mempool: use rte constant macro instead of GCC builtin To: =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=C3=B8rup?= , Thomas Monjalon Cc: Tyler Retzlaff , dev@dpdk.org, Andrew Rybchenko , probb@iol.unh.edu X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 3:49=E2=80=AFPM Morten Br=C3=B8rup wrote: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, 3 July 2024 15.17 > > > > 14/06/2024 16:32, David Marchand: > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:51=E2=80=AFPM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > > > > > 20/03/2024 22:33, Tyler Retzlaff: > > > > > Use newly introduced __rte_constant(e) macro instead of directly = using > > > > > __builtin_constant_p() allowing mempool to be built by MSVC. > > > > > > > > Does it mean we should enable mempool build? > > > > If yes, please send a v2. > > > > > > I guess now it is possible, as I merged some other patches on mempool > > > from Stephen that were for MSVC. > > > Tyler, can you send a v2 so it passes through the CI? > > > > I tried a retest last week and there is this failure on Ubuntu 24.04 > > that I don't manage to reproduce locally: > > > > /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/string_fortified.h:29:10: error: arg= ument 2 > > null where non-null expected [-Werror=3Dnonnull] > > 29 | return __builtin___memcpy_chk (__dest, __src, __len, > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > 30 | __glibc_objsize0 (__dest)); > > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/string_fortified.h:29:10: note: in a= call > > to built-in function '__builtin___memcpy_chk' > > In function 'memcpy', > > inlined from 'pcapng_add_option' at ../lib/pcapng/rte_pcapng.c:131:2, > > pcapng_add_option() in rte_pcapng.c has memcpy() on line 132 [1] (and has= a fix for this error, by comparing len > 0 before calling memcpy()); older= versions had memcpy() on line 131, so the CI must be building with an olde= r version of rte_pcapng.c. > > [1]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/dpdk/v24.07-rc1/source/lib/pcapng/rte_pca= png.c#L132 > [2]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/dpdk/v24.03/source/lib/pcapng/rte_pcapng.= c#L131 This is likely the reason. Looking at the report: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2024-June/717951.html _Testing issues RETEST #1_ Submitter: Tyler Retzlaff Date: Wednesday, March 20 2024 21:33:36 DPDK git baseline: Repo:dpdk Branch: master CommitID:80ecef6d1f71fcebc0a51d7cabc51f73ee142ff2 $ git describe --contains 80ecef6d1f71fcebc0a51d7cabc51f73ee142ff2 v24.03-rc3^0 >From the discussions on the retest mechanism, I understand we need to ask for a rebase. I sent a new retest. Let's see... --=20 David Marchand