From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] build: add support for vendor specific ARM
 cross builds
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 22:56:08 +0530
Message-ID: <20180119172606.u3lpcoz2534wlbsq@Pavan-LT>
References: <20180119131508.7768-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
 <20180119164126.GC16980@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, harry.van.haaren@intel.com,
 thomas@monjalon.net
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from NAM03-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-dm3nam03on0048.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.41.48])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2051A1B309
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 18:26:40 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180119164126.GC16980@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 04:41:26PM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 06:45:08PM +0530, Pavan Nikhilesh wrote:
> > Add various vendor specific cross build targets.
> > This can be verified by using linaro toolchain and running
> >
> > 	meson build --cross-file config/arm/arch64_armv8_<cpu>_cross
> >
>
> "arch64-armv8"? I thought we were standardizing on "arm64" as the naming
> here, or alternatively I think it should be "aarch64", right?
>

Currently, make uses "arm64-<platform>" as the naming convention.
I think either "arm64-<plat>" is better as we can easily represent
"arm-<plat>" (v7).

> In terms of file naming, do we want to have a file extension on these
> files. I wondering if we want to change "_cross" to ".cross" for
> instance. The basic example in the meson docs uses a .txt extension but
> that looks weird to me. No strong opinion on my end, just looking for
> any other ideas.
>
> > In future more cross build targets can be added.
>
> Yes, good idea. Is config/<arch> the best place to hold these, or should
> we have a separate cross-build folder? I quite like having them in
> config like you have done, but wondering if anyone disagrees?
>

I split this patch out from the other series specifically so that we could
discuss and agree upon common name/path etc. :-).

Thanks,
Pavan
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
> > ---
> >  config/arm/arch64_armv8_generic_cross  | 10 +++++++
> >  config/arm/arch64_armv8_thunderx_cross | 13 +++++++++
> >  config/arm/meson.build                 | 52 +++++++++++++++++++---------------
> >  3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 config/arm/arch64_armv8_generic_cross
> >  create mode 100644 config/arm/arch64_armv8_thunderx_cross
> >
>
> Adding Thomas on CC as he always has opinions on file locations and
> naming.
>
> /Bruce