From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: spinlock: Move constructor function out of header
	file
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 00:06:30 +0200
Message-ID: <16886146.HTal4qelT5@xps13>
References: <20160714132729.27024-1-damarion@cisco.com>
 <20160714200336.119bcfce@jvn>
 <CC779A8A-2F0B-4A0F-B812-94E9F69F28A6@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com>,
 Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
 David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
To: "Damjan Marion (damarion)" <damarion@cisco.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (mail-wm0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E89837A4
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 00:06:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id i5so5889172wmg.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 15:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CC779A8A-2F0B-4A0F-B812-94E9F69F28A6@cisco.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-07-14 18:10, Damjan Marion:
> Dear Jan,
>=20
> Thank you for your comments. A bit too much overhead to submit simple=
 patch
> so let=E2=80=99s forget about it. I will just add it as it is to our =
private
> collection of patches.

These are changes trivial to fix when applying.
I strongly prefer that you upstream patches instead of keeping patches
in the VPP repository. I will help you in this task.
Thanks for the effort.

> If anybody wants to pick it from here, please do...

I can update the bsdapp Makefile and do the trivial changes for you,
if we agree that we do not need to touch to other archs (see below).


> > On 14 Jul 2016, at 20:03, Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com> wr=
ote:
> >> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/Makefile
> >> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/Makefile
> >> @@ -106,6 +106,7 @@ SRCS-$(CONFIG_RTE_EXEC_ENV_LINUXAPP) +=3D rte_=
keepalive.c
> >>=20
> >> # from arch dir
> >> SRCS-$(CONFIG_RTE_EXEC_ENV_LINUXAPP) +=3D rte_cpuflags.c
> >> +SRCS-$(CONFIG_RTE_EXEC_ENV_LINUXAPP) +=3D rte_spinlock.c
> >=20
> > This is not good, you provide rte_spinlock.c only for x86. Building=

> > for any other arch would fail to find this file.

It is not used in other archs. It is really x86 specific.

> > Moreover, the bsdapp/eal/Makefile should reflect this situation as
> > well.

Good catch.