Re: FW: compilation|FAILURE| pw(141419) sid(32237) job(PER_PATCH_BUILD12332)[v2,6/6] eal: provide option to use compiler memcpy instead of RTE

[Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:20:42AM +0200, Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> On 2024-06-20 10:11, Mattias Rönnblom wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message----- From: sys_stv@intel.com <sys_stv@intel.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, 20 June 2024 09:55 To: test-report@dpdk.org; Mattias
> > Rönnblom <mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com> Subject: compilation|FAILURE|
> > pw(141419) sid(32237) job(PER_PATCH_BUILD12332)[v2,6/6] eal: provide
> > option to use compiler memcpy instead of RTE
> > 
> > 

<snip>

> > *Build Failed #1: OS: UB2404-32 Target: i686-native-linuxapp-gcc
> > FAILED: drivers/libtmp_rte_net_fm10k.a.p/net_fm10k_fm10k_rxtx_vec.c.o
> > gcc -Idrivers/libtmp_rte_net_fm10k.a.p -Idrivers -I../drivers
> > -Idrivers/net/fm10k -I../drivers/net/fm10k -Idrivers/net/fm10k/base
> > -I../drivers/net/fm10k/base -Ilib/ethdev -I../lib/ethdev -I. -I..
> > -Iconfig -I../config -Ilib/eal/include -I../lib/eal/include
> > -Ilib/eal/linux/include -I../lib/eal/linux/include
> > -Ilib/eal/x86/include -I../lib/eal/x86/include -Ilib/eal/common
> > -I../lib/eal/common -Ilib/eal -I../lib/eal -Ilib/kvargs -I../lib/kvargs
> > -Ilib/log -I../lib/log -Ilib/metrics -I../lib/metrics -Ilib/telemetry
> > -I../lib/telemetry -Ilib/net -I../lib/net -Ilib/mbuf -I../lib/mbuf
> > -Ilib/mempool -I../lib/mempool -Ilib/ring -I../lib/ring -Ilib/meter
> > -I../lib/meter -Idrivers/bus/pci -I../drivers/bus/pci
> > -I../drivers/bus/pci/linux -Ilib/pci -I../lib/pci -Idrivers/bus/vdev
> > -I../drivers/bus/vdev -fdiagnostics-color=always -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
> > -Wall -Winvalid-pch -Wextra -Werror -std=c11 -O3 -include rte_config.h
> > -Wcast-qual -Wdeprecated -Wformat -Wformat-nonliteral -Wformat-security
> > -Wmissing-declarations -Wmissing-prototypes -Wnested-externs
> > -Wold-style-definition -Wpointer-arith -Wsign-compare
> > -Wstrict-prototypes -Wundef -Wwrite-strings
> > -Wno-address-of-packed-member -Wno-packed-not-aligned
> > -Wno-missing-field-initializers -Wno-zero-length-bounds
> > -Wno-pointer-to-int-cast -D_GNU_SOURCE -m32 -fPIC -march=native -mrtm
> > -DALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API -DALLOW_INTERNAL_API -Wno-format-truncation
> > -DRTE_LOG_DEFAULT_LOGTYPE=pmd.net.fm10k -MD -MQ
> > drivers/libtmp_rte_net_fm10k.a.p/net_fm10k_fm10k_rxtx_vec.c.o -MF
> > drivers/libtmp_rte_net_fm10k.a.p/net_fm10k_fm10k_rxtx_vec.c.o.d -o
> > drivers/libtmp_rte_net_fm10k.a.p/net_fm10k_fm10k_rxtx_vec.c.o -c
> > ../drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
> > ../drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c: In function
> > ‘fm10k_desc_to_olflags_v’:
> > ../drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c:132:21: error: implicit
> > declaration of function ‘_mm_cvtsi128_si64’; did you mean
> > ‘_mm_cvtsi128_si16’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] 132 |
> > vol.dword = _mm_cvtsi128_si64(vtag1);
> 
> From what I can tell, _mm_cvtsi128_si64() is only available on 64-bit
> x86. I fail to understand how this code could ever compile on 32-bit.
> 
> A somewhat unrelated question: why are there no maintainers listed for
> many of the Intel drivers?
> 

I can certainly answer this last question :-) A number of the DPDK team in PRC
who were our driver maintainers are no longer working on DPDK, and so
removed themselves from the maintainers file. Those of us based in Ireland
and India are ramping up on the drivers over time and should step up
officially as maintainers - especially for the most active drivers - in the
near future. The drivers are not so much unmaintained, as that we don't
have a single "best" name to put against them just yet.

/Bruce