> -----Original Message----- > From: Thierry Herbelot <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 12:02 PM > To: [email protected]; oulijun <[email protected]>; Thomas Monjalon > <[email protected]> > Cc: Juraj Linkeš <[email protected]>; Bruce Richardson > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: fix Hisilicon kunpeng920 SoC build > > > Message: 4 > > Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 11:24:27 +0100 > > From: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> > > To: oulijun <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], > > [email protected], [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: fix Hisilicon > > kunpeng920 SoC build > > Message-ID: <5309744.5Ik2CEZAj8@thomas> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > > > 24/02/2021 10:17, oulijun: > >> > >> ? 2021/2/24 15:41, Thomas Monjalon ??: > >>> 24/02/2021 02:34, oulijun: > >>>> > >>>> ? 2021/2/10 17:41, Thomas Monjalon ??: > >>>>> 03/02/2021 13:46, Lijun Ou: > >>>>>> From: Chengchang Tang <[email protected]> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Because of the '9ca2f16' have merged, the current hns3 pmd driver > >>>>>> can not be directly complied on the kunpeng920 server board. > >>>>>> Therefore, we need to fix the meson build. > >>>>>> Besides, add kunpeng 920 SoC meson cross compile target. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Fixes: 9ca2f16faa7f ("config/arm: isolate generic build") > >>>>> > >>>>> Why do you think this patch is fixing the one above? > >>>>> It looks just a new config, not a fix. Am I missing something? > >>>>> > >>>> I'm sorry to see you so late. In the meantime, we are celebrating > >>>> the Spring Festival. This patch fixes the problem. If the patch is > >>>> not added, the latest version cannot be directly compiled on the > >>>> Kunpeng 930 server board.In addition, the cross compilation configuration > file is added. > >>> > >>> Please can you explain what was removed which breaks your compilation? > >>> > >> I understand that implementation_id is identified in 9ca2f16. If the > >> configuration file does not contain implementation_id, it will be > >> displayed as unsupported. > >> > >> The error as follows: > >> config/arm/meson.build:227:2: ERROR: Problem encountered: Unsupported > >> Arm implementer: 0x48. Please add support for it or use the generic > >> (-Dmachine=generic) build. > >> > >> Besides, we use the -Dmachine=generic, the bug is not resolved. > >> the cmd as: > >> meson build or meson -Dmachine=generic build > > > > What is the result of a generic build? > > Hello, > > Following dpdk commit 91c730fd4e093cd, the generic compilation for Arm is > selected with '-Dmachine=default' > > The comments in config/arm/meson.build should be updated to follow the > change in default machine name: > https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/config/arm/meson.build#n241 > https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/config/arm/meson.build#n256 >
Good catch, this is because http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/[email protected]/ was part of the same patch series as 9ca2f16faa7f. When the former patch was removed from the series, not everything in the series got properly updated. Lijun, please try "meson -Dmachine=default build". This should result in the same behavior as before 9ca2f16faa7f. > Regards > > Thierry > > > >
