Hi Ehrhardt, Update the dpdk 19.11.8-rc1 test result for Intel part. We tested build and basic cases, no bug was found.
Regards, Bo Chen > -----Original Message----- > From: dev <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Christian Ehrhardt > Sent: April 12, 2021 17:13 > To: dpdk stable <[email protected]> > Cc: dev <[email protected]>; Abhishek Marathe > <[email protected]>; Akhil Goyal <[email protected]>; > Ali Alnubani <[email protected]>; Walker, Benjamin > <[email protected]>; David Christensen > <[email protected]>; Govindharajan, Hariprasad > <[email protected]>; Hemant Agrawal > <[email protected]>; Stokes, Ian <[email protected]>; Jerin > Jacob <[email protected]>; Mcnamara, John <[email protected]>; > Ju-Hyoung Lee <[email protected]>; Kevin Traynor > <[email protected]>; Luca Boccassi <[email protected]>; Pei Zhang > <[email protected]>; Yu, PingX <[email protected]>; Xu, Qian Q > <[email protected]>; Raslan Darawsheh <[email protected]>; Thomas > Monjalon <[email protected]>; Peng, Yuan <[email protected]>; > Chen, Zhaoyan <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] 19.11.8 patches review and test > > On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 9:44 AM Christian Ehrhardt > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Here is a list of patches targeted for stable release 19.11.8. > > > > The planned date for the final release is 16th April. > > > > Please help with testing and validation of your use cases and report > > any issues/results with reply-all to this mail. For the final release > > the fixes and reported validations will be added to the release notes. > > > > Note: > > This is a special interim release not following the releases of recent > > mainline (that was 19.11.7). Instead this addresses issues with > > >=19.11.6 identified and discussed in: > > http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/2021-March/029418.html > > > > Testing-Note: > > The only changes this release has over the former one are about linking. > > We switch back to how it was <=19.11.6 since it regressed some use-cases. > > The most known one at the moment is building OVS 2.13 vs a DPDK that > > was built with meson. It seems that make-based DPDK builds are > unaffected. > > Due to that this verification phase should not so much be about the > > usual performance, functionality, ... (I'm happy if you run those, but > > they are not strictly required). Instead the focus should mostly about > > buildability via the various possible combinations that exist. > > I can confirm that with 19.11.8 the build of OpenVswitch vs a meson-built > DPDK works again. > Tested on OVS 2.13.3 vs DPDK 19.11.8-rc1 in Ubuntu 20.04 and 20.10 on all > supported architectures (amd64,armhf,arm64 and ppc64el - the others > s390x/riscv64 don't have DPDK built). > > > > A release candidate tarball can be found at: > > > > https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/tag/?id=v19.11.8-rc1 > > > > These patches are located at branch 19.11 of dpdk-stable repo: > > https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/ > > > > Thanks. > > > > Christian Ehrhardt <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > Christian Ehrhardt (7): > > Revert "Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: prevent overlinking""" > > Revert "Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: improve static linking > > flags""" > > Revert "Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: output drivers first for > > static > build""" > > Revert "Revert "Revert "build/pkg-config: move pkg-config file > creation""" > > Revert "Revert "Revert "build: always link whole DPDK static > > libraries""" > > Revert "Revert "Revert "devtools: test static linkage with > > pkg-config""" > > Regenerate meson.build changes required due to reverts > > > > -- > Christian Ehrhardt > Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server > Canonical Ltd
