From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 09:31:33 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v4 3/3] dpdk: new package In-Reply-To: <20160416020708.03ce1bf3@jvn> References: <1459042284-6684-1-git-send-email-viktorin@rehivetech.com> <1459042284-6684-4-git-send-email-viktorin@rehivetech.com> <20160415235203.3f9ed61e@free-electrons.com> <20160416020708.03ce1bf3@jvn> Message-ID: <20160416093133.1be7c7b8@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Sat, 16 Apr 2016 02:07:08 +0200, Jan Viktorin wrote: > > I have enabled PCI_MSI=y and UIO=y in my kernel configuration, and > > still, I don't have any .ko file installed in my target. Is this > > expected? > > Of course, you are right. They are built but not installed. Fixed. Good, thanks! > > When the architecture is ARMv7, please pass: > > > > CPU_FLAGS= > > > > Otherwise, the dpdk build system passes -mfloat-abi=softfp, which makes > > the build fail when the selected ABI is EABIhf. And please report the > > bug upstream: the dpdk build system should not make assumptions on the > > selected ARM ABI. > > Well, this leads to some hardcoded check of architecture into the > dpdk.mk. I don't like such approach. Well, I don't see what's the problem with that really, but... > Would you instead accept the > following (temporary) patch into Buildroot as a solution for this? > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-April/037577.html ... if such a patch gets accepted upstream, then I'm fine with carrying the patch in Buildroot in the mean time. > > Can you fix those issues and resend? > > Sure, I will resend after I solve the ARM ABI issue. Well, you solved it it seems, right? :-) Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com