It looks like this is still from v2, v3 (fixes the build issue, missing operator) was submit the same day.. The abi-test failure referenced is present on v3 (which the bot has only accepted today). Patch v4 will be split as requested.
Thanks. - David Miller On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 10:34 AM David Miller <dmiller...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm happy to split it, I will resubmit when these changes are made. > I was planning to spend some time to figure out why the CI abi test is > failing / it had previously passed all tests locally. > The (one) long term maintainer will be Mathew S Thoennes <tar...@us.ibm.com>. > I will relay your concerns about CI and have him speak with David Christensen. > > - David Miller > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 10:25 AM David Marchand > <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Hello David, > > > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 3:35 AM David Miller <dmiller...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Minimal changes to drivers and app to support the IBM s390x. > > > > This seems a bit more than "minimal changes" :-). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Miller <dmiller...@gmail.com> > > > Reviewed-by: Mathew S Thoennes <tar...@us.ibm.com> > > > --- > > > app/test-acl/main.c | 4 + > > > app/test/test_acl.c | 1 + > > > app/test/test_atomic.c | 7 +- > > > app/test/test_cmdline_ipaddr.c | 12 +- > > > app/test/test_cmdline_num.c | 110 ++++ > > > app/test/test_hash_functions.c | 29 + > > > app/test/test_xmmt_ops.h | 14 + > > > buildtools/pmdinfogen.py | 11 +- > > > config/meson.build | 2 + > > > config/s390x/meson.build | 51 ++ > > > config/s390x/s390x_linux_clang_ubuntu | 19 + > > > doc/guides/nics/features/i40e.ini | 1 + > > > drivers/common/mlx5/mlx5_common.h | 9 + > > > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_s390x.c | 630 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/net/i40e/meson.build | 2 + > > > drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c | 8 +- > > > drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.h | 2 + > > > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rx.c | 24 +- > > > drivers/net/octeontx/base/octeontx_pki_var.h | 6 + > > > examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_em.c | 8 + > > > examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_lpm_s390x.h | 137 ++++ > > > examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_s390x.h | 261 ++++++++ > > > lib/acl/acl_bld.c | 3 + > > > lib/acl/acl_gen.c | 9 + > > > lib/acl/acl_run_scalar.c | 8 + > > > lib/acl/rte_acl.c | 27 + > > > lib/acl/rte_acl.h | 5 +- > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/meson.build | 16 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_atomic.h | 44 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_byteorder.h | 43 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_cpuflags.h | 41 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_cycles.h | 44 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_io.h | 184 ++++++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_mcslock.h | 18 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_memcpy.h | 55 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_pause.h | 22 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_power_intrinsics.h | 20 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_prefetch.h | 46 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_rwlock.h | 42 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_spinlock.h | 85 +++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_ticketlock.h | 18 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/include/rte_vect.h | 35 ++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/meson.build | 16 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/rte_cpuflags.c | 91 +++ > > > lib/eal/s390x/rte_cycles.c | 11 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/rte_hypervisor.c | 11 + > > > lib/eal/s390x/rte_power_intrinsics.c | 51 ++ > > > lib/hash/rte_fbk_hash.h | 7 + > > > lib/lpm/meson.build | 1 + > > > lib/lpm/rte_lpm.h | 2 + > > > lib/lpm/rte_lpm6.c | 18 + > > > lib/lpm/rte_lpm_s390x.h | 130 ++++ > > > meson.build | 2 + > > > 53 files changed, 2439 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > - This is too big to review. > > Please split this patch separating the really minimum support (getting > > EAL and main libraries to build, disabling the rest that is "broken" > > for s390x) then adding more components support in later patches. > > > > RISC V and LoongArch "recent" additions are good examples. > > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=23380&state=%2A&archive=both > > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=24969&state=%2A&archive=both > > > > - We need one maintainer for this new architecture. > > > > - You'll notice that the DPDK CI reported issues, please fix them. > > > > - What are the plans in terms of CI? We need some compilation testing > > and ideally some regular runtime testing. > > Maybe you can reach out to IBM PPC DPDK guys, like David Christensen, > > to see what they are doing. > > > > > > -- > > David Marchand > >
