Jim, Ben, Thanks for the explanation, I will rely on the dpdk from the spdk dir. Thanks for the help. Best regards, Gyan On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:15 PM Harris, James R wrote: > Hi Gyan, > > If you do not need to use your own copy of DPDK, and can just rely on the > dpdk submodule in the SPDK repository, then Ben’s suggestions in his e-mail > are the best way to go. > > If you need to use a version of DPDK different from the dpdk submodule – > maybe you have some of your own patches, or want to use a newer DPDK > version than the dpdk submodule – then my suggestions below will only work > if DPDK is first built explicitly. > http://doc.dpdk.org/guides/linux_gsg/build_dpdk.html gives more details > on how to build DPDK on your own. > > If you still have any problems, feel free to reach out on the mailing list > and someone will help out. > > Thanks, > > -Jim > > On 8/24/18, 4:50 PM, "SPDK on behalf of Gyan Prakash" < > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org on behalf of gyapra2016(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Jim, > > Okay, sure, thanks for the explanation. > > BTW, I tried your suggested steps for spdk-18.07 and here is the > output: > > *make CONFIG_DPDK_DIR=./dpdk-18.05/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc* > CONFIG_RDMA=y > CC lib/vhost/vhost.o > In file included from vhost_internal.h:39:0, > from vhost.c:43: > rte_vhost/rte_vhost.h:47:24: fatal error: rte_config.h: No such file or > directory > #include > ^ > compilation terminated. > make[2]: *** [vhost.o] Error 1 > make[1]: *** [vhost] Error 2 > make: *** [lib] Error 2 > > > For other option, config works fine but make gave me error: > usr/bin/ld: > > /root/spdk-18.07/spdk-18.07/dpdk-18.05/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/lib/librte_eal.a(eal.o): > relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata.str1.1' can not be used when > making > a shared object; recompile with -fPIC > > /root/spdk-18.07/spdk-18.07/dpdk-18.05/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/lib/librte_eal.a(eal.o): > error adding symbols: Bad value > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > make[1]: *** [/root/spdk-18.07/spdk-18.07/build/lib/libspdk.so] Error 1 > make: *** [shared_lib] Error 2 > > > > I will proceed further from the latest version, but not sure why > spdk-18.07 > is not working. > > Thanks, > Gyan > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 4:44 PM Harris, James R < > james.r.harris(a)intel.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Gyan, > > > > Thanks for the update. Those unit test error messages are > expected. The > > unit tests are specifically testing error cases which generate error > > messages like you see here. The run summary at the bottom is the key > > output and shows 0 test failures. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Jim > > > > > > On 8/24/18, 4:38 PM, "SPDK on behalf of Gyan Prakash" < > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org on behalf of gyapra2016(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Benjamin, > > > > Tests passed with your suggested steps, but there are some vHost > > errors, > > not sure if it is false positive. Please see below: > > > > lapsed time = 0.000 seconds > > ++ uname -s > > + '[' Linux = Linux ']' > > + /root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/test/unit/lib/vhost/vhost.c/vhost_ut > > > > > > CUnit - A unit testing framework for C - Version 2.1-2 > > http://cunit.sourceforge.net/ > > > > > > Suite: vhost_suite > > Test: desc_to_iov > .../root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/lib/vhost/vhost.c: > > 454:spdk_vhost_vring_desc_to_iov: *ERROR*: > SPDK_VHOST_IOVS_MAX(129) > > reached > > passed > > > > > > > > * Test: create_controller > > .../root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/lib/vhost/vhost.c: > > 661:spdk_vhost_dev_register: *ERROR*: Can't register controller > with no > > name/root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/lib/vhost/vhost.c: > > 619:spdk_vhost_parse_core_mask: *ERROR*: no cpu is selected among > > reactor > > mask(=1)/root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/lib/vhost/vhost.c: > > 673:spdk_vhost_dev_register: *ERROR*: cpumask 0x2 is invalid > (app mask > > is > > 0x1)/root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/lib/vhost/vhost.c: > > 686:spdk_vhost_dev_register: *ERROR*: Resulting socket path for > > controller > > > > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/lib/vhost/vhost.c: > > 679:spdk_vhost_dev_register: *ERROR*: vhost controller > vdev_name_0 > > already > > exists.* > > passed > > Test: dev_find_by_vid ...passed > > Test: remove_controller > > .../root/spdk-aug24-2018/spdk/lib/vhost/vhost.c: > > 772:spdk_vhost_dev_unregister:* *ERROR**: Controller vdev_name_0 > has > > still > > valid connection. > > passed > > > > Run Summary: Type Total Ran Passed Failed Inactive > > suites 1 1 n/a 0 0 > > tests 4 4 4 0 0 > > asserts 53 53 53 0 n/a > > > > Elapsed time = 0.000 seconds > > + '[' no = yes ']' > > + set +x > > > > > > ===================== > > *All unit tests passed* > > ===================== > > WARN: lcov not installed or SPDK built without coverage! > > WARN: neither valgrind nor ASAN is enabled! > > > > > > > > Thanks for the help, > > Gyan > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 3:23 PM Walker, Benjamin < > > benjamin.walker(a)intel.com> > > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2018-08-24 at 15:00 -0700, Gyan Prakash wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I am trying to build spdk-18.07 with dpdk-18.05 on Centos 7.4 > > system with > > > > kernel 4.13.9. > > > > > > > > make DPDK_DIR=./dpdk-18.05/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc > CONFIG_RDMA=y > > > > > > > > and seeing following compilation failure. Can someone please > tell > > me > > > what I > > > > am missing there? > > > > > > > > CC lib/vhost/vhost.o > > > > In file included from vhost_internal.h:39:0, > > > > from vhost.c:43: > > > > rte_vhost/rte_vhost.h:47:24: fatal error: rte_config.h: No > such > > file or > > > > directory > > > > #include > > > > ^ > > > > compilation terminated. > > > > make[2]: *** [vhost.o] Error 1 > > > > make[1]: *** [vhost] Error 2 > > > > make: *** [lib] Error 2 > > > > > > > > > This means that the build couldn't find your DPDK installation > (I > > think). > > > As a > > > quick sanity test, can you try this sequence of commands: > > > > > > git clone https://github.com/spdk/spdk > > > cd spdk > > > git submodule update --init > > > ./scripts/pkgdep.sh > > > ./configure --with-rdma > > > make > > > ./test/unit/unittest.sh > > > > > > This sequence is taken from this page: > > > http://www.spdk.io/doc/getting_started.html > > > > > > If you need to do something more advanced, like use a fork of > DPDK, > > that's > > > also > > > possible but we should confirm that the simple case is working > first. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Gyan > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 1:45 AM Shahar Salzman < > > > shahar.salzman(a)kaminario.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I ran the dpdk build with T=spdk-linuxapp-gcc and build > works > > fine. > > > > > > > > > > Isn't config/common_spdk only for configuration options (no > > reference > > > for > > > > > this type of definition) ? I would have thought that the > > compilation > > > flag > > > > > should go in spdk/dpdkbuild/Makefile, or in one of the mk > files? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > *From:* SPDK on behalf of > Verkamp, > > Daniel > > > < > > > > > daniel.verkamp(a)intel.com> > > > > > *Sent:* Thursday, May 10, 2018 8:31:21 PM > > > > > *To:* Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Shahar, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of the config options you listed below are already > disabled > > in the > > > > > config that we use to build the DPDK subodule (see > > config/common_spdk > > > in > > > > > our DPDK branch). Can you confirm that this works for you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can add -fno-strict-aliasing to the DPDK > > config/common_spdk > > > > > file as well if this is necessary to make it work on RHEL > 6 (I am > > > surprised > > > > > DPDK doesn’t already compile with this enabled). If you > could > > upload a > > > > > second patch for this, that would be great. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > -- Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org] *On > Behalf Of > > *Shahar > > > > > Salzman > > > > > *Sent:* Thursday, May 10, 2018 6:39 AM > > > > > *To:* Storage Performance Development Kit < > spdk(a)lists.01.org> > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I updated the patch as you suggested. > > > > > > > > > > How do you want to approach the gcc flag and the modules > that > > spdk does > > > > > not need? > > > > > > > > > > If you are building dpdk from an external makefile (as we > are > > doing), > > > all > > > > > of the above can be added to the makefile with CONFIG...=n > and > > > > > EXTRA_CFLAGS="-fno-strict-aliasing", or I can send you > another > > dpdk > > > patch > > > > > fixing this within dpdk, so there is no change in the > builder, > > and > > > maybe > > > > > there is another option. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > *From:* SPDK on behalf of > Luse, > > Paul E < > > > > > paul.e.luse(a)intel.com> > > > > > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 8:19:33 PM > > > > > *To:* Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That’s great, thanks Daniel! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org < > > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org>] > > > > > *On Behalf Of *Verkamp, Daniel > > > > > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 9:43 AM > > > > > *To:* Storage Performance Development Kit < > spdk(a)lists.01.org> > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with Paul’s review; it looks like it shouldn’t be > a big > > > problem to > > > > > carry a patch for this in our DPDK submodule, at least > while > > CentOS 6 > > > is > > > > > still officially supported. (I posted a few review > comments on > > the > > > patch, > > > > > but the general approach looks fine.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Intel build pool had a CentOS 6 test machine in the > pool > > until > > > > > recently, and we should be able to resurrect it to provide > test > > > coverage > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > -- Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org < > > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org>] > > > > > *On Behalf Of *Shahar Salzman > > > > > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 6:12 AM > > > > > *To:* Storage Performance Development Kit < > spdk(a)lists.01.org> > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the review. > > > > > > > > > > We are now working on CentOS7 support, but it is not > complete > > yet, so > > > we > > > > > will be on CentOS6 about 6-12 months. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > *From:* SPDK on behalf of > Luse, > > Paul E < > > > > > paul.e.luse(a)intel.com> > > > > > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 3:51:23 PM > > > > > *To:* Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for doing that! I put my 2 cents on the review, one > more > > data > > > point > > > > > for the maintainers might help – help long do you believe > your > > team > > > will be > > > > > on CentOS6? Don’t need a specific date but are we talking > months, > > > years, > > > > > indefinitely? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the other implication of accepting this in the > community > > would > > > be > > > > > to spin up a CentOS6 VM for some basic testing for as long > as we > > hold > > > that > > > > > patch in our DPDK fork which is not a huge thing but want > to > > make sure > > > > > that’s clear as well. If nothing else we’ll know if > something > > else > > > breaks > > > > > it sooner than later and will need to decide, again, at > that > > time if we > > > > > pull it or if it’s a high enough priority for anyone to > dig in > > and > > > find a > > > > > potential solution like you did here. Assuming, of > course, that > > this > > > one > > > > > is accepted J > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org < > > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org>] > > > > > *On Behalf Of *Shahar Salzman > > > > > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 2:01 AM > > > > > *To:* spdk(a)lists.01.org > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ben, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pushed the fix to gerrithub - > > > > > https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/spdk/dpdk/+/410559/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We are currently using a "frozen" dpdk tree based version > 16.07, > > but I > > > am > > > > > pushing to using the spdk fork and performing regular > updates so > > if > > > things > > > > > break, I will attempt to fix them, and post on the list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The above fixes a blunt gcc API issue, but there are more > subtle > > inner > > > > > module issues which I have not investigated, simply > removed the > > > modules all > > > > > together as they are not needed by spdk. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can set up a howto for users who may need CentOS6 > support or > > we can > > > > > modify the config (as these modules are not really needed > for > > spdk). > > > For > > > > > the sake of clarity here are the modules "configed out" > (as I > > mentioned > > > > > they are not used by spdk): > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_BOND=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_CRYPTODEV=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_SECURITY=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_SW_EVENTDEV=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_OCTEONTX_SSOVF=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_LPM=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_FLOW_CLASSIFY=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_TABLE=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PIPELINE=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_TEST_PMD=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_TAP=n > > > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_AVP_PMD=n > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding the -fn-strict-aliasing issue, I'll see if I can > do > > the same > > > > > trick I did for the gcc alias in the Makefile, and push > the fix > > for > > > review. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > *From:* SPDK on behalf of > Walker, > > > Benjamin < > > > > > benjamin.walker(a)intel.com> > > > > > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 8, 2018 7:49:44 PM > > > > > *To:* spdk(a)lists.01.org > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-05-08 at 14:34 +0000, Shahar Salzman wrote: > > > > > > Got it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was tracking the dpdk project, and focused on the > branch that > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > told me > > > > > > to work on. > > > > > > So would the correct process be to push the patch to the > > spdk/dpdk > > > > > > > > > > gerrithub > > > > > > and discuss the commit, or the other way around? > > > > > > > > > > Yes - go ahead and push to spdk/dpdk on GerritHub so we > can all > > review > > > it. > > > > > The > > > > > SPDK project has never written out a policy on which > versions of > > DPDK > > > are > > > > > supported for any given SPDK release. The code is always > tested > > using > > > the > > > > > latest > > > > > released DPDK, and then attempts to support older versions > of > > DPDK are > > > > > done in > > > > > an ad hoc manner. Similarly, the project never explicitly > states > > which > > > > > operating > > > > > systems are supported. Instead, we indicate which operating > > systems the > > > > > code is > > > > > regularly tested on (Fedora N and N-1, Ubuntu latest, > Ubuntu LTS, > > > CentOS 7, > > > > > FreeBSD 11). > > > > > > > > > > I see that CentOS 6 is no longer receiving full updates > and is in > > > > > maintenance > > > > > only mode. It will stop receiving even maintenance updates > in > > 2020. I > > > > > think that > > > > > is indicative of the level of support SPDK should provide > here. > > > > > > > > > > Given the above, if this patch can be applied to the DPDK > fork > > and > > > doesn't > > > > > have > > > > > any additional impact, I'm not opposed to applying it. That > > wouldn't, > > > in my > > > > > mind, mean that SPDK is committed to supporting CentOS 6 > > indefinitely. > > > But > > > > > certainly that support could continue while it is > relatively > > easy and > > > > > convenient. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: SPDK on behalf of > Luse, > > Paul E < > > > > > > > > > > paul.e.luse@ > > > > > > intel.com> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 5:14:10 PM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > > Subject: Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, I understand that. SPDK maintains a fork of dpdk > in > > github at > > > > > > > > > > https://g > > > > > > ithub.com/spdk/dpdk for the purpose of temporarily > putting > > things in > > > > > > > > > > that we > > > > > > need that can’t make it upstream yet for whatever reason > – > > this is > > > the > > > > > > submodule in the SPDK repo. I’m not saying that it makes > > sense for > > > your > > > > > > > > > > patch > > > > > > to land there permanently but it does make sense to talk > about > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > No problem on not being on the call, we’ll get some > input from > > the > > > > > > > > > > maintainers > > > > > > and others I’m sure… > > > > > > > > > > > > Thx > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > From: SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org < > > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org>] > > > > > > > > > > On Behalf Of Shahar Salzman > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 7:04 AM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit < > spdk(a)lists.01.org> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Paul, > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem is that the patch is in dpdk and not in > spdk, and > > this > > > is the > > > > > > reason I offered to support it. > > > > > > The patch (bellow) is only a few lines long modifying the > > deprecated > > > > > > > > > > attribute > > > > > > definition, a modification to the config, and an extra > > compilation > > > flag. > > > > > > All of the above are required in order to build dpdk > 18.01 on > > > CentOS6, > > > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > are no problems building spdk on CentOS6. > > > > > > > > > > > > I understood that you are already applying minor patches > to > > dpdk, so > > > > > > > > > > question > > > > > > is, whether this patch can be added? > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately due to some personal issues, I am unable to > > > participate in > > > > > > today's meeting. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > > From: SPDK on behalf of > Luse, > > Paul E < > > > > > > > > > > paul.e.luse@ > > > > > > intel.com> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 4:25:29 PM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > > Subject: Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Shahar, > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple of quick things: > > > > > > > > > > > > * thanks for putting all this time and effort into > trying to > > make > > > this > > > > > > > > > > work! > > > > > > * in the community model, patches aren’t accepted based > on one > > > > > > > > > > individual’s > > > > > > ability/desire to support them so appreciate the offer > but in > > > general any > > > > > > patch that is accepted becomes the responsibly of the > community > > > (mostly > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > maintainers) to support it long term. Otherwise we’d > have > > what I > > > like > > > > > > > > > > to call > > > > > > “the flea market model” where there’s a bunch of separate > > individuals > > > > > > supporting their own things with very little cohesiveness > > across > > > > > > > > > > everything J > > > > > > > > > > > > So, wrt next steps, if the patch isn’t a tremendous > amount of > > effort > > > I > > > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > suggest you go ahead and submit it. That’s the best way > to get > > > everyone > > > > > > > > > > on the > > > > > > same page wrt exactly what we’re talking about. If it > is some > > > > > > > > > > significant > > > > > > effort then, as Pawel states, you can call into a > community > > meeting > > > (see > > > > > > > > > > email > > > > > > I sent out last night) or you can explain more details > on this > > list. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again!! > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > From: SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org < > > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org>] > > > > > > > > > > On Behalf Of Wodkowski, PawelX > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 5:57 AM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit < > spdk(a)lists.01.org> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > I think someone will answer you on this mailing list but > there > > is > > > > > > > > > > community > > > > > > meeting today too. You can raise this if you wish. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pawel > > > > > > > > > > > > From: SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org < > > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org>] > > > > > > > > > > On Behalf Of Shahar Salzman > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 2:23 PM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit < > spdk(a)lists.01.org> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > I attempted to push the gcc support patch to dpdk, and > got > > rejected > > > > > > > > > > since they > > > > > > do not wish to support CentOS6. > > > > > > Would it be possible to manually add the patch to the > > supported dpdk > > > > > > > > > > version > > > > > > (currently 18.01). > > > > > > I would be happy to support CentOS6 issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Shahar Salzman > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 3:40:51 PM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > > Cc: Ilan Steinberg; Ido Benda; Yael Shavit > > > > > > Subject: Re: Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, got everything to work. > > > > > > > > > > > > For DPDK, I had to to do the following: > > > > > > add a patch to make the new __rte_experimental attribute > to > > work > > > > > > remove a bunch of modules via config which had some > gnarly > > > compilation > > > > > > > > > > errors, > > > > > > and are not needed for spdk > > > > > > use -fno-strict-aliasing in the EXTRA_CFLAGS to avoid a > ton of > > strict > > > > > > > > > > aliasing > > > > > > errors. > > > > > > > > > > > > I tried spdk 18.01, and ran into some issues with the > shared > > library > > > > > > > > > > build. As > > > > > > I saw that Daniel had already dealt with them, I tried > cherry > > > picking, > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > eventually used the master branch. > > > > > > I got these type of warnings: > > > > > > > > > > > > /usr/bin/ld: warning: librte_mbuf.so.3.1, needed by > > > > > > > > /khome/shahar.salzman/Kaminario/git/dpdk/x86_64-native-linuxapp- > > > > > > gcc/lib/librte_bus_pci.so, not found (try using -rpath or > > > -rpath-link) > > > > > > /usr/bin/ld: warning: librte_ethdev.so.8.1, needed by > > > > > > > > /khome/shahar.salzman/Kaminario/git/dpdk/x86_64-native-linuxapp- > > > > > > gcc/lib/librte_bus_pci.so, not found (try using -rpath or > > > -rpath-link) > > > > > > > > > > > > I added the following patch bellow to make them go away. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll approach the dpdk community on the mailing list in > order > > to get > > > the > > > > > > __rte_experimental stuff to work. > > > > > > My final configuration is: > > > > > > CenrOS6.4 > > > > > > gcc 4.4.7-17 > > > > > > dpdk v18.02 > > > > > > spdk master > > > > > > > > > > > > What are the next steps? > > > > > > > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Here is the patch to remove the warnings above. > > > > > > commit d4ef744de1cc4928972b7042d1c90aff12db7867 > > > > > > Author: shahar salzman > > > > > > Date: Tue Apr 24 14:31:52 2018 +0300 > > > > > > > > > > > > lib/env_dpdk: add required libraries > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/env_dpdk/env.mk b/lib/env_dpdk/env.mk > > > > > > index 450043c..b46bfed 100644 > > > > > > --- a/lib/env_dpdk/env.mk > > > > > > +++ b/lib/env_dpdk/env.mk > > > > > > @@ -68,6 +68,18 @@ ifneq ($(wildcard > > > > > > > > > > $(DPDK_ABS_DIR)/lib/librte_malloc.*),) > > > > > > DPDK_LIB_LIST += rte_malloc > > > > > > endif > > > > > > > > > > > > +ifneq (, $(wildcard $(DPDK_ABS_DIR)/lib/librte_mbuf.*)) > > > > > > +DPDK_LIB_LIST += rte_mbuf > > > > > > +endif > > > > > > + > > > > > > +ifneq (, $(wildcard $(DPDK_ABS_DIR)/lib/librte_net.*)) > > > > > > +DPDK_LIB_LIST += rte_net > > > > > > +endif > > > > > > + > > > > > > +ifneq (, $(wildcard > $(DPDK_ABS_DIR)/lib/librte_ethdev.*)) > > > > > > +DPDK_LIB_LIST += rte_ethdev > > > > > > +endif > > > > > > + > > > > > > # librte_pci and librte_bus_pci were added in DPDK > 17.11. > > Link these > > > > > > libraries conditionally > > > > > > # based on their existence to maintain backward > compatibility. > > > > > > ifneq (, $(wildcard $(DPDK_ABS_DIR)/lib/librte_pci.*)) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: SPDK on behalf of > Shahar > > Salzman > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > zman(a)kaminario.com> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 9:57 AM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > > Subject: Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > Great, and thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > I have been running into issues compiling dpdk 17.11 on > CentOS6 > > > (there > > > > > > > > > > seems > > > > > > to be a gcc issue that does not exist in other > versions), I'll > > focus > > > my > > > > > > efforts on dpdk 18.02. > > > > > > From: SPDK on behalf of > Verkamp, > > Daniel > > > < > > > > > > > > > > daniel.ve > > > > > > rkamp(a)intel.com> > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 9:40:36 PM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit > > > > > > Subject: Re: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Shahar, > > > > > > > > > > > > I’ve pushed a patch for the SPDK master branch that > should > > allow it > > > to > > > > > > > > > > compile > > > > > > with DPDK 16.07: > > https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/spdk/spdk/+/408743/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerrit Code Review > > > > > > > > > > > > review.gerrithub.io > > > > > > > > > > > > Keep in touch. Copyright © 2017 | GerritForge Ltd. > > > info(a)gerritforge.com > > > > > > www.gerritforge.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, DPDK 16.07 is no longer supported upstream; I > highly > > > recommend > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > you update to a newer version. SPDK is currently tested > with > > DPDK > > > 18.02. > > > > > > > > > > > > The VFIO issue you mention has also been fixed on SPDK > master, > > and it > > > > > > > > > > will be > > > > > > part of the SPDK v18.04 release. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > -- Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > From: SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org < > > > spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org>] > > > > > > > > > > On Behalf Of Shahar Salzman > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2018 6:41 AM > > > > > > To: Storage Performance Development Kit < > spdk(a)lists.01.org> > > > > > > Subject: [SPDK] Building spdk on CentOS6 > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > Finally got to looking at support of spdk build on > CentOS6, > > things > > > look > > > > > > > > > > good, > > > > > > except for one issue. > > > > > > spdk is latest 18.01.x version, dpdk is 16.07 (+3 dpdk > patches > > to > > > allow > > > > > > compilation) and some minor patches (mainly some memory > > configuration > > > > > > > > > > stuff), > > > > > > kernel is a patched 4.9.6. > > > > > > > > > > > > build succeeded except for the usage of the dpdk function > > > > > > > > > > pci_vfio_is_enabled. > > > > > > I had to apply the patch bellow, removing the usage of > this > > function > > > and > > > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > compilation completed without any issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that I am missing some sort of dpdk > configuration as > > I see > > > that > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > function is built, but not packaged into the generated > archive. > > > > > > > > > > > > I went back to square one and ran the instructions in > > > > > > > > > > http://www.spdk.io/doc/g > > > > > > etting_started.html, but I see no mention of dpdk there. > > Actually the > > > > > > ./configure requires it. > > > > > > > > > > > > My next step is to use a more recent dpdk, but shouldn't > this > > work > > > with > > > > > > > > > > my > > > > > > version? Am I missing some dpdk configuration? > > > > > > BTW, as we are not using vhost, on our 17.07 version we > simply > > use > > > > > > CONFIG_VHOST=n in order to skip this, but I would be > happier > > if we > > > used a > > > > > > better solution. > > > > > > > > > > > > Shahar > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Here is the patch to remove use of this function: > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/env_dpdk/vtophys.c > b/lib/env_dpdk/vtophys.c > > > > > > index 92aa256..f38929f 100644 > > > > > > --- a/lib/env_dpdk/vtophys.c > > > > > > +++ b/lib/env_dpdk/vtophys.c > > > > > > @@ -53,8 +53,10 @@ > > > > > > #define SPDK_VFIO_ENABLED 1 > > > > > > #include > > > > > > > > > > > > +#if 0 > > > > > > /* Internal DPDK function forward declaration */ > > > > > > int pci_vfio_is_enabled(void); > > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > > > > > struct spdk_vfio_dma_map { > > > > > > struct vfio_iommu_type1_dma_map map; > > > > > > @@ -341,9 +343,11 @@ spdk_vtophys_iommu_init(void) > > > > > > DIR *dir; > > > > > > struct dirent *d; > > > > > > > > > > > > +#if 0 > > > > > > if (!pci_vfio_is_enabled()) { > > > > > > return; > > > > > > } > > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > > > > > dir = opendir("/proc/self/fd"); > > > > > > if (!dir) { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > SPDK mailing list > > > > > > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > > > > > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > SPDK mailing list > > > > > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > > > > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > SPDK mailing list > > > > > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > > > > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > SPDK mailing list > > > > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > > > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > SPDK mailing list > > > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > SPDK mailing list > > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > SPDK mailing list > > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > _______________________________________________ > SPDK mailing list > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk > > > _______________________________________________ > SPDK mailing list > SPDK(a)lists.01.org > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk >