From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] replace DPDK config and build system Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 16:26:17 -0700 Message-ID: <20170607162617.00d009ff@xeon-e3> References: <20170607104743.275149-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Bruce Richardson Return-path: Received: from mail-pg0-f42.google.com (mail-pg0-f42.google.com [74.125.83.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A712BB8 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2017 01:26:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id v18so9971921pgb.1 for ; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 16:26:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170607104743.275149-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 11:47:42 +0100 Bruce Richardson wrote: > The prototype is incomplete, but it does build a reasonable number of our > libraries, some unit tests, the i40e PMD and the testpmd binary, and I have > successfully passed traffic using testpmd from the build. Some things are > not fully correct, e.g. static builds aren't working right now, as I haven't > correctly done all the dependency tracking, I think, and the cpu flag > detection has issues. It also has only been tried on x86_64 linux, on a > couple of systems, so YMMV. However, I feel it's a reasonable enough start > point to show what we might be able to achieve. Remember that in many cases the build system and the target system are different. One of the problems with previous DPDK builds where build system was on bare metal but deployment target was on a more limited VM environment. I sweated through lots of pain on that.