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 B65FA41BBD; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 15:09:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B94E4067B; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 15:09:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-yb1-f179.google.com (mail-yb1-f179.google.com [209.85.219.179]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 783744021E for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 15:09:26 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-yb1-f179.google.com with SMTP id cf30so991881ybb.11 for ; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 06:09:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=s9ebZ2nl+2lDL1HIUbVDL0Qi7ZNUEzJJF0/KbPrz3G4=; b=OTcWEv6c+sCUJRcsGDV0MtNISDreyJL9HTXJ2uf+ewlehaKqMt4/H1uaCYeRCpozzG zIqoyoSVWMpyuOUSU8KGkfHKSpQw2732oPEpX0jGVO3fPtS83t/WRC91Ak2TwEmx7jg8 j/qWnpllgaNu7pnFaafegLviFepXIlIKW7L1ZjZwfnsRSvUEl2Tx+2iVKxicAC95lTyS ijjT5sDKSVG1jtTaSoOr/GgZIM1d1vs3waUxYprcxc/WIQBEafOOCTRobQJfw57oToJP nv1BSyxinpx9aEtDFSuqXv8ZeFU2qup8GtpTk/bpPZWimCKpMrfEiInPJBhXvwDBUiB5 9Aqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=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=s9ebZ2nl+2lDL1HIUbVDL0Qi7ZNUEzJJF0/KbPrz3G4=; b=FMNrzIMCzeF9mL+hfqzWwysYb8yN5nhFlV6H/RrX3KDXsqboDvpr+xCvZ33oeezNx+ lemRDXpKJmiiRS13S5vja+BHQKqwhyF3oEbXsEiSOS9UdpCmGa1ge0RjT2XLaXdFkAqM y7N+l7vGC4igairXyh2fIcoTJLiXWx83Q4Jiyx4Yxw3RrMYkJltGI9KddKxpxufJePqw ZlW1L5Jkbjbkp1JGydVQX4BCM4XVd4QetSb/sDkUnk5iSOwniWvWd+4egSRwc1K74D4d pErMdlZ/Ucu50toovrDrsjd0XF1GlguN27byB8et/BkBcmjpT04gv9ZyW+UktR4jd/UY 0X+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWuXY0V87D9/JtK9tQMiYdqqANXoKsAIXa/fA7RLWvmsfSD/fKN YpSKnsz6Z1j8/hPZ8u1kBJDxwl3ogUcpgx2aOSE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9HA5QtaEyEFnyxyeGjiqIeU8bSp1jEpxOBG7dBQlorcjSxlCHG20sF8rqkKRXHH2FL9uyLeFGvzu3My+bdqwU= X-Received: by 2002:a25:bf91:0:b0:7cc:bda4:1bf6 with SMTP id l17-20020a25bf91000000b007ccbda41bf6mr982664ybk.220.1675433365807; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 06:09:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230112113556.47485-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20230112113556.47485-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> From: Ben Magistro Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 09:09:14 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] Specify C-standard requirement for DPDK builds To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net, david.marchand@redhat.com, mb@smartsharesystems.com, roretzla@linux.microsoft.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009d261305f3cc3afb" 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 --0000000000009d261305f3cc3afb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Since this topic keeps coming up in other threads I'll chime in with my $0.01 here. We've been using CentOS 7 for awhile (and working on migrating off) but have had to leverage devtoolset/llvmtoolset for various reasons. I remember a discussion of installing a different compiler coming up but don't remember which thread that was in/what the outcome was. While I'd like to just brush over C7 and say there is a compatible compiler available so just make the change I also realize that making that change could be quite disruptive to existing code bases. However, the 22.11 LTS will be EOL in Nov 2024. CentOS 7 is EOL Jun 2024. For the 23.x series and going forward I don't think starting with a C11 requirement is an unreasonable ask. On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:36 AM Bruce Richardson wrote: > Traditionally, DPDK has never specified a minimum C standard used either > in DPDK builds or for applications using DPDK. Following discussion > on-list about C standards, this RFC attempts to start the process of > codifying what our standards expectations are. No code changes are made > by this RFC, instead only the build parameters are changed to explicitly > specify: > > * C99 standard is used to build DPDK itself. This is supported by all > supported compiler versions of GCC and Clang. > * The headers are checked for compatibility with gcc89 standard, which > was the default standard used by the oldest supported version of GCC. > DPDK headers do not build with the official C89 standard, and, to the > best of my knowledge, have never done so. > > Bruce Richardson (1): > build: increase minimum C standard for DPDK builds > > buildtools/chkincs/meson.build | 1 + > meson.build | 1 + > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) > > -- > 2.37.2 > > --0000000000009d261305f3cc3afb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Since this topic keeps coming up in other threads I'll= chime in with my $0.01 here.=C2=A0 We've been using CentOS 7 for awhil= e=C2=A0(and working on migrating off) but have had to leverage devtoolset/l= lvmtoolset=C2=A0for various reasons.=C2=A0 I remember a discussion of insta= lling a different compiler coming up but don't remember which thread th= at was in/what the outcome was.=C2=A0 While I'd like to just brush over= C7 and say there is a compatible compiler available so just make the chang= e I also realize that making that change could be quite disruptive to exist= ing code bases.

However, the 22.11 LTS will be EOL in No= v 2024.=C2=A0 CentOS 7 is EOL Jun 2024.=C2=A0 For the 23.x series and going= forward I don't think starting with a C11 requirement is an unreasonab= le ask.

On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 6:36 AM Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> w= rote:
Traditiona= lly, DPDK has never specified a minimum C standard used either
in DPDK builds or for applications using DPDK. Following discussion
on-list about C standards, this RFC attempts to start the process of
codifying what our standards expectations are. No code changes are made
by this RFC, instead only the build parameters are changed to explicitly specify:

* C99 standard is used to build DPDK itself. This is supported by all
=C2=A0 supported compiler versions of GCC and Clang.
* The headers are checked for compatibility with gcc89 standard, which
=C2=A0 was the default standard used by the oldest supported version of GCC= .
=C2=A0 DPDK headers do not build with the official C89 standard, and, to th= e
=C2=A0 best of my knowledge, have never done so.

Bruce Richardson (1):
=C2=A0 build: increase minimum C standard for DPDK builds

=C2=A0buildtools/chkincs/meson.build | 1 +
=C2=A0meson.build=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | 1 +
=C2=A02 files changed, 2 insertions(+)

--
2.37.2

--0000000000009d261305f3cc3afb--