Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/7] common/octeontx: enable build only on 64bit Linux
From: Jerin Jacob <hidden>
Date: 2021-03-25 12:46:34
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:33 PM Thomas Monjalon [off-list ref] wrote:
25/03/2021 11:58, Kinsella, Ray:quoted
On 25/03/2021 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:quoted
25/03/2021 11:42, Thomas Monjalon:quoted
24/03/2021 11:55, Jerin Jacob:quoted
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 10:33 PM [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
From: Pavan Nikhilesh <redacted> Due to Linux kernel dependency, only enable build for 64bit Linux. Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <redacted>Series Acked-by: Jerin Jacob [off-list ref]I've reorganized the commits per family of drivers, so it makes more sense than grouping per driver class with "common/octeontx" for title for all: net/thunderx: enable build only on 64-bit Linux common/octeontx: enable build only on 64-bit Linux common/octeontx2: enable build only on 64-bit Linux and applied.Actually not applied yet. I'm not sure what to do for the ABI check which is broken because some drivers are not compiled anymore in 32-bit build. I've workarounded locally by removing the dump files in the reference build. Should we add an exception in libabigail.abignore?In the past we said that depreciating HW support would be considered to be same as an ABI Breakage. From the policy ... "Updates to the minimum hardware requirements, which drop support for hardware which was previously supported, should be treated as an ABI change."So the patches should wait 21.11. Everybody agree?
Looks good to me to postpone. @Ray Kinsella @Thomas Monjalon @McDaniel, Timothy @David Marchand @Neil Horman Currently, I merged DLB v1 driver removal patch to next-eventdev. Is this ABI breakge[1]? http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20210316210812.15614-1-timothy.mcdaniel@intel.com/ [1] From the policy ... "Updates to the minimum hardware requirements, which drop support for hardware which was previously supported, should be treated as an ABI change."