2016-02-16 16:04, Fernando Seiti Furusato: > Hi Thomas. > > On 02/12/2016 05:18 PM, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: > > Hello Thomas. > > Thanks for your quick response. > > > > On 02/12/2016 03:37 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >> 2016-02-12 12:05, Fernando Seiti Furusato: > >>> Add a proper ifeq statement to set the mcpu as needed for ppc64el, as > >>> the only one originally set is not valid for ppc architectures. > >> > >> What is the benefit of using the default machine config, compared to > >> the power8 one? > >> > >> Don't you think the default machine should be renamed core2? > > > > I think it would be better indeed. Thanks for pointing that out. > > > >> > >> [...] > >>> +ifeq (ppc64le,$(shell uname -m)) > >>> + MACHINE_CFLAGS += -mcpu=power8 > >> > >> Why this flag is not set in mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk ? > >> > > > > This and what observed above would make a better patch. > > Let me try those. > > I will be just changing the flag within mk/machine/power8/rte.vars.mk so > it will be used on ppc64le.
Does it mean that only little endian is supported on POWER8? > I thought since I am not sure how it will affect others, I will not mess > with the default file. Yes let's keep it for another patch if someone is concerned. > I had to copy config/defconfig_ppc_64-power8-linuxapp-gcc to > config/defconfig_ppc64le-native-linuxapp-gcc, because the build searches > for it on ppc64le. Should I include that in the patch? > Do you think there is a better approach? Not sure to understand. I think there is something wrong in the commands you use to compile. Are you using "make config T=ppc_64-power8-linuxapp-gcc" ?
