From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy Subject: Re: Can't compile DPDK if both CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS and LIBRTE_PMD_XENVIRT are set to "yes" Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 14:46:15 +0000 Message-ID: <56547837.5080803@intel.com> References: <56546CAE.8050401@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Panu Matilainen Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4226A8E8B for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 15:46:22 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <56546CAE.8050401@redhat.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 24/11/2015 13:57, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 11/23/2015 08:37 PM, Martinx - =E3=82=B8=E3=82=A7=E3=83=BC=E3=83=A0=E3= =82=BA wrote: >> Hello! >> >> My name is Thiago, I'm trying to compile DPDK 2.0, 2.1 and/or 2.2-rc1, >> on Ubuntu with Xen support but, it does not build... >> >> Also, initially, I'm using DPDK sources from Ubuntu APT repository >> but, it is also reproducible using upstream DPDK tarball as well, >> explained as follows: >> >> Problem: >> >> * It is not possible to use the following DPDK options at the same tim= e: >> >> CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS >> LIBRTE_PMD_XENVIRT >> >> Ubuntu DPDK .deb package uses CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS and, >> without it, it can't build its .deb binary package (step: "make -f >> debian/rules binary" doesn't work). >> >> So, if you have the above two options set to "yes", the following >> error appear while building DPDK: >> >> http://pastebin.com/xUsQPxh8 >> > [...] >> Build error: >> >> http://pastebin.com/fuUkpF4w >> >> If you remove "CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS", then, you can build it >> with "LIBRTE_PMD_XENVIRT", and vice-versa. But, without >> "...COMBINE_LIBS", Ubuntu .deb package doesn't get builded. >> >> BTW, the option LIBRTE_XEN_DOM0 is fine when also enabling=20 >> COMBINE_LIBS... >> >> Am I missing something? Is this by design or a DPDK bug? > > DPDK bug I would say. The combined library has been increasingly in=20 > risk of collapsing under its own weight for some time now. > > A much better way of achieving the same is using a so called linker=20 > script which is essentially just an ascii file listing all the=20 > individual libraries which the linker handles behind the scenes. > FWIW, that's how the combined library is packaged on Fedora and RHEL=20 > and consumers like OVS and pktgen never knew the difference. > > The linker script approach has been suggested before but somehow the=20 > threads died without nothing actually happening. I'll revive the patch=20 > and post here shortly. Unless Sergio (cc'd) who previously worked on=20 > the patches has a newer version cooking silently? > I haven't worked on it since, so you probably are in a better position=20 to continue the work than me. Sergio > P.S. I know, a "linker script" sounds exotic but they're actually=20 > rather commonplace. On an average Linux system, libc.so is a linker=20 > script for example. > > - Panu -