From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/1] net/af_xdp: introduce AF XDP PMD
 driver
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2019 15:51:46 +0100
Message-ID: <8f1ac08396f0deaca458201370c08b1334ee6b84.camel@debian.org>
References: <20190402154653.711-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
 <20190402154653.711-2-xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
 <d2bf5816f98d715ff6e0575930f233e8b45732de.camel@debian.org>
 <20190403095939.GA32340@intel.com>
 <56ce5855b02d47a085a8d36451561c400f0b039c.camel@debian.org>
 <0dde8c20e9992047f29d39ad45dcf511244a5297.camel@debian.org>
 <80c81c0c-cf64-59f8-a592-26cd865fbd89@intel.com>
 <37073834d0b9a9f5a6e9f39bac3adc5eb29779ab.camel@debian.org>
 <5bc49c51-04f4-6f73-889d-d3c0ff749784@intel.com>
 <46d92b70a40581462f5ee3ba301c793c4cf0c2df.camel@debian.org>
 <20190403144327.GB36385@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
To: Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wr1-f67.google.com (mail-wr1-f67.google.com
 [209.85.221.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 993E61B443
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  3 Apr 2019 16:51:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wr1-f67.google.com with SMTP id t17so8737182wrw.13
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 03 Apr 2019 07:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20190403144327.GB36385@intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 22:43 +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
> On 04/03, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> [snip]
> > > Got it.
> > >=20
> > > In above steps, 'libbpf' also build from kernel source tree, will
> > > it
> > > be problem
> > > in you builds to not have it build from source?
> > >=20
> > > If not, taking into account that xsk.h also will be fixed, only
> > > 'tools/include/asm/barrier.h' remains the problem, and it looks
> > > like
> > > it can be
> > > solved, please check above.
> >=20
> > libbpf is already packaged separately in Debian and I think other
> > distros will follow soon, so it's all good for me once the barrier
> > issue is solved.
> >=20
> > https://packages.debian.org/buster/libbpf-dev
> >=20
> >=20
> > From the makefile's perspective it should not matter where it comes
> > from - the headers should be expected to be in /usr/include and the
> > library in /usr/lib* - and pkg-config can help with that if
> > available.
> > And if a user wants to use a custom path, then it's no different
> > than
> > any of the other dependencies on other external libraries
>=20
> From tools/lib/bpf/Makefile, after make install_lib and make
> install_headers,
> the headers and library would be put in /usr/local/include/bpf and
> /usr/local/lib*,
> Is it ok?

Yes certainly that's fine, that's expected for local installations, and
users can specify a prefix with the upstream's makefile if they want to
install somewhere else.

--=20
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi