On 7/4/21 10:45 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

02/07/2021 14:53, Andrew Rybchenko:

quoted

On 7/2/21 3:30 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

quoted

02/07/2021 10:43, Andrew Rybchenko:

quoted

On 7/1/21 4:05 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:

quoted

On 7/1/21 3:34 PM, David Marchand wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 11:22 AM Andrew Rybchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

The build works fine for me on FC34, but it has
libatomic-11.1.1-3.fc34.x86_64 installed.

I first produced the issue on my "old" FC32.
Afaics, for FC33 and later, gcc now depends on libatomic and the
problem won't be noticed.
FC32 and before are EOL, but I then reproduced the issue on RHEL 8
(and Intel CI reported it on Centos 8 too).

I see. Thanks for the clarification.

quoted

quoted

I'd like to understand what we're trying to solve here.
Are we trying to make meson to report the missing library
correctly?

If so, I think I can do simple check using cc.links()
which will fail if the library is not found. I'll
test that it works as expected if the library is not
completely installed.

I tried below diff, and it works for me.
"works" as in net/sfc gets disabled without libatomic installed:

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

 # for gcc compiles we need -latomic for 128-bit atomic ops
 if cc.get_id() == 'gcc'
+    code = '''#include <stdio.h>
+    void main() { printf("Atomilink me.\n"); }
+    '''
+    if not cc.links(code, args: '-latomic', name: 'libatomic link check')
+        build = false
+        reason = 'missing dependency, "libatomic"'
+        subdir_done()
+    endif
     ext_deps += cc.find_library('atomic')
 endif

Many thanks, LGTM. I'll pick it up and add comments why
it is checked this way.

I've send v4 with the problem fixed. However, I'm afraid
build test systems should be updated to have libatomic
correctly installed. Otherwise, they do not really check
net/sfc build.

When testing on old systems, sfc won't be tested anymore after this patchset.
On recent systems, sfc should be enabled I guess.
I don't see how to manage better, sorry.

I see. I thought that it is possible to install missing
package on corresponding systems to make build coverage
better.

Now I automatically test build on problematic distros
with previously missing packages installed. So I have
internal build coverage anyway.

David asked for installing libatomic:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/ci/CAJFAV8xCNBL4yEZU0c=dJGYS+13QM7Uz7e2qnUkMuM7eaKKw+Q@mail.gmail.com/

We should wait for it to be installed otherwise ABI check will fail.

Yes, I see. Thanks.