Looks like this patch serie has been merged into dpdk-next-net/rel_16_04.
What would be the usual way to submit changes for new comments? Would it be incremental changes (new commit) based on previous one? Thanks.
________________________________________
From: Thomas Monjalon <redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:33 PM
To: Liming Sun
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; bruce.richardson@intel.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] driver/net/mpipe: support native build on tilegx platform.

2016-02-09 18:37, Liming Sun:

From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
A comment about the TILE-Mx would be welcome.
Is it supported currently?
Isn't it an ARM arch?

[lsun] Yes, it's ARM arch, but with similar mpipe driver.
It's not fully supported yet. I'll remove this change and add it in a different serie when it's ready.

OK
So we'll discuss how to integrate it later.

quoted

+# Compile combined lib by default.
+CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS=y

Why forcing this option in the defconfig file?

[lsun] It's just trying to make it handy for other applications like OVS or ODP on top of DPDK. However we could remove this change if it's not the recommended way.

Yes please remove it.

quoted

 ARCH  ?= tile
+
+HOST_ARCH := ${shell uname -m}
+ifneq ($(filter tile%,${HOST_ARCH}),) CROSS = else
 CROSS ?= tile-
+endif

I don't think the CROSS variable should have a default value.
It really depends on the toolchain.

[lsun] Make sense. The current code (before the change) has default value 'CROSS ?= tile-' defined, which cause some issue when doing native build. Another way is to define it as "CROSS ?=" just like other platforms. So when doing cross-compile, we could pass " CROSS=tile-" .

No need to keep a "CROSS ?=" line.
The variables defined in the command line get the priority.

Talking about the toolchain, is it possible to build DPDK with the provided binary toolchain http://www.tilera.com/scm/tilegx-x86_64.tar.bz2 ?
This is the Tilera Open Source page: http://www.tilera.com/scm/

[lsun] I tried it just now. The gcc appears ok. But this tarball lacks of some header files and libraries to compile DPDK.

Yes that's what I've experienced.

We're looking into it to see whether it can be easily fixed.

Please keep us informed when the toolchain is ready. Thanks