From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] Eliminate zero length arrays in DPDK
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 10:10:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YgzNeYi73AbVih45@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D86EB0@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 11:05:09AM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 16 February 2022 10.33
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 03:00:56PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > Yet another case of applying Linux kernel best practices
> > > to DPDK. Flexible arrays are supported by Clang, GCC and
> > > Microsoft compilers (part of C99).
> > >
> > Do we need to start explicitly stating that DPDK uses C99 features, and
> > adding -std=c99 to our build flags? Are we also requiring that
> > applications
> > are compiled with c99 features to use this (I would hope that they are,
> > but
> > I'm not sure we can mandate it).
>
> No to -std=c99. It's >= C99 for applications; we should not prevent them from using a newer C standard.
Yes. For build flags, I was referring only to having it in the cflags for the
build of DPDK itself, not for apps. We definitely need to minimise the
build flags we expose to apps.
>
> Adding a note about the C standard version to the DPDK requirements
> documentation would be very nice. It only mentions a certain compiler
> version required. But I think that documenting the detailed build and
> runtime requirements (and why they are that way) is another task.
>
Sure, we should do that. I am just wanting to be sure that if we specify a
minimum of C99, we won't get complaints back from those with legacy
codebasees which only support C89/C90. I am therefore wondering if we need
to have our public headers C90-compliant?
/Bruce
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-16 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-15 23:00 Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-15 23:00 ` [RFC 1/2] devtools: add script to check for zero length array Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-15 23:00 ` [RFC 2/2] treewide: replace zero-length array with flex array Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-16 9:27 ` [RFC 0/2] Eliminate zero length arrays in DPDK Morten Brørup
2022-02-16 9:33 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-02-16 10:05 ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-16 10:10 ` Bruce Richardson [this message]
2022-02-17 7:41 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2022-02-24 21:51 ` Morten Brørup
2022-02-24 23:03 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-16 18:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-02-17 8:09 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2022-02-16 10:39 Morten Brørup
2022-02-17 8:32 ` Tyler Retzlaff
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=YgzNeYi73AbVih45@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/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).