From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use generated flags for SSE and AVX checks
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 16:59:36 +0100
Message-ID: <2241188.EjHfKBdCQS@xps13>
References: <1480952058-13591-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
To: dev@dpdk.org
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wj0-f173.google.com (mail-wj0-f173.google.com
 [209.85.210.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D66947D1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  5 Dec 2016 16:59:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wj0-f173.google.com with SMTP id tg4so39164074wjb.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 07:59:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id vr9sm21032840wjc.35.2016.12.05.07.59.36
 for <dev@dpdk.org>
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Mon, 05 Dec 2016 07:59:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1480952058-13591-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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>

2016-12-05 16:34, Thomas Monjalon:
> Clean up the code to always use the flags RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_*
> generated by the DPDK makefile rte.cpuflags.mk.

This patch does not work because RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_* are generated
for the whole library when including rte.vars.mk.
So the flags are not accurate when overriding the flags per file like
it is done in rte_acl.

So the questions are:
	- should we use RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_?
	- should we override the flags per file?
	- will we be able to use the function attribute __target__?