From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Ehrhardt Subject: Re: [PATCH] mk: fix missing DEPDIRS to avoid libarary underlinking Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:20:51 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1465811334-22395-1-git-send-email-christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> <4880734.Dg9G2McolW@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mail-qg0-f50.google.com (mail-qg0-f50.google.com [209.85.192.50]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A76256 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:21:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id p34so65508414qgp.1 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 03:21:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4880734.Dg9G2McolW@xps13> 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 Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-06-13 11:48, Christian Ehrhardt: > > --- a/drivers/net/af_packet/Makefile > > +++ b/drivers/net/af_packet/Makefile > > @@ -54,5 +54,6 @@ SRCS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_PACKET) += > rte_eth_af_packet.c > > DEPDIRS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_PACKET) += lib/librte_mbuf > > DEPDIRS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_PACKET) += lib/librte_ether > > DEPDIRS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_PACKET) += lib/librte_kvargs > > +DEPDIRS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_AF_PACKET) += lib/librte_eal > > It looks more logical to have eal as first DEPDIR in these lists. Yeah, thought about alphanumeric order, but eal first should be most appropriate. > > --- a/drivers/net/vhost/Makefile > > +++ b/drivers/net/vhost/Makefile > > @@ -36,6 +36,8 @@ include $(RTE_SDK)/mk/rte.vars.mk > > # > > LIB = librte_pmd_vhost.a > > > > +LDLIBS += -lpthread > > + > > It is not a DEPDIR but an external dependency. It deserves a separate patch. > Yes, sorry for just wrapping it in. Will send a v2 with both changes later. > Do we need it in rte.app.mk? It is an EAL dependency as well. > Not IMHO: EAL depends on it so librte_eal.so depends on it as it should (just reverified by ldd). I don't see a reason that any app created should depend on pthread other than if it actually uses libpthread.