Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] eal/cpuflags: add x86 based cpu flags

[Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>]

So that isn't the issue either. 

$ grep RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS build-gcc-shared/install/dump/librte_eal.dump
4646:      <enumerator name='RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS' value='104'/>
$ grep RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS /build/dpdk/reference/v20.02/build-gcc-shared/dump/librte_eal.dump
3296:      <enumerator name='RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS' value='87'/>
                                     1.7-1.fc31                             @updates

I finally got libabigail complaining about rte_cpu_flag_t, after doing a complete clear down.
So the suppression _is_ required. 
 
I then spent the following hour trying to identify the gremlin in the system with no luck.
In anycase, added my ack below.


On 29/04/2020 12:39, David Marchand wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 6:39 PM Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu> wrote:
>>> diff --git a/devtools/libabigail.abignore b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
>>> index a59df8f13..045f436fb 100644
>>> --- a/devtools/libabigail.abignore
>>> +++ b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
>>
>> Kevin - you still have the surpession.
>> I am testing locally with 1.7.1, and it doesn't complain when I disable the supression.
>> Are you seeing something different?
> 
> Using current master libabigail, without the rule Kevin included, I
> get the warning:
> 
> 1 function with some indirect sub-type change:
> 
>   [C] 'function int rte_cpu_get_flag_enabled(rte_cpu_flag_t)' at
> rte_cpuflags.c:144:1 has some indirect sub-type changes:
>     parameter 1 of type 'enum rte_cpu_flag_t' has sub-type changes:
>       type size hasn't changed
>       17 enumerator insertions:
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512DQ' value '87'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512IFMA' value '88'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512CD' value '89'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512BW' value '90'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512VL' value '91'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512VBMI' value '92'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512VBMI2' value '93'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_GFNI' value '94'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_VAES' value '95'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_VPCLMULQDQ' value '96'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512VNNI' value '97'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512BITALG' value '98'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512VPOPCNTDQ' value '99'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_CLDEMOTE' value '100'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_MOVDIRI' value '101'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_MOVDIR64B' value '102'
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_AVX512VP2INTERSECT' value '103'
>       1 enumerator change:
>         'rte_cpu_flag_t::RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS' from value '87' to
> '104' at rte_cpuflags.h:12:1
> 
> 
> Ray, could you check that the reference and new dumps in your env
> contain this enum?
> 
> $ grep RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS
> $HOME/abi/v20.02/x86_64-native-linux-gcc+shared+debug+ASSERT+RTE_IBVERBS_LINK_DLOPEN/dump/librte_eal.dump
>       <enumerator name='RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS' value='87'/>
> $ grep RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS
> $HOME/builds/x86_64-native-linux-gcc+shared+debug+ASSERT+RTE_IBVERBS_LINK_DLOPEN/install/dump/librte_eal.dump
>       <enumerator name='RTE_CPUFLAG_NUMFLAGS' value='104'/>
> 
> If you are missing those, you might have built dpdk without debuginfo.
> 

Acked-By: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>