From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ferruh Yigit Subject: Re: [PATCH] mk: fix kernel modules build dependency Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 19:43:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20180329153931.26351-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <2419180.MvykWTCLKm@xps> <0a59c197-0331-a122-f997-b8a77b39e01b@intel.com> <1680117.05lWP9jXLg@xps> <79a33084-a6fc-d04a-a503-3c8cc15a58b2@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hemant.agrawal@nxp.com, dev@dpdk.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BCE0AACB for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 20:43:07 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <79a33084-a6fc-d04a-a503-3c8cc15a58b2@intel.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 3/29/2018 7:21 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 3/29/2018 6:01 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >> 29/03/2018 18:50, Ferruh Yigit: >>> On 3/29/2018 5:43 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>> 29/03/2018 18:38, Ferruh Yigit: >>>>> On 3/29/2018 5:32 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>> 29/03/2018 17:48, Ferruh Yigit: >>>>>>> On 3/29/2018 4:39 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>>>> Some kernel modules may need some header files to be "installed" >>>>>>>> in the build directory. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When running multiple threads of make, kernel modules can try to >>>>>>>> be compiled before the lib headers are ready: >>>>>>>> make -j3 >>>>>>>> kernel/linux/kni/kni_misc.c:19:37: fatal error: >>>>>>>> exec-env/rte_kni_common.h: No such file or directory >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there a reason to keep header in eal when module itself moved into kernel? >>>>>> >>>>>> It seems you missed my comment below: >>>>>> >>>>>> On a related note, this header file >>>>>> lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h >>>>>> could be moved to lib/librte_kni/ >>>>>> Opinion? >>>>> >>>>> Ahh, yes we are saying same thing. >>>>> But not sure if it should go under lib/librte_kni/ or kernel/linux/kni/? >>>>> I lean to kernel/linux/kni/. >>>> >>>> Why in kernel/? >>>> >>>> Logically, kernel/ depends on lib/ but not the reverse. >>>> >>>> And regarding the licensing, we avoid BSD files in Linux modules. >>> >>> From functionality point of view, module provides the functionality and it >>> should provide the header, this can be all subjective tough :) >>> >>> Or in other words, if you have the kernel module, you can write another piece of >>> userspace application (without using librte_kni) and it will be functional. >>> But if you have the librte_kni only, it won't be functional on its own. >>> >>> Providing header with kernel enables other userspace app to user KNI. >> >> So you are saying we should reverse the dependency? >> It would mean moving all headers used by kernel modules in kernel/ directory: > > No, not talking about moving headers to kernel/ folder. But we can "liberate" J > the kernel modules. > > For KNI, rte_kni_common.h is shared between kernel and userspace, can't escape > from it. But why this common header needs to depend other dpdk headers at all? > Indeed commenting out rte_common and rte_config worked fine, it seem there is > already no dependency. Hemant is right, putting rte_kni_common makes build dependent to module build, and module is more fragile. I agree to move header to userspace library. > > Same thing for igb_uio, why in needs to depend other dpdk headers? > Following seems fixing the issue, yes it is duplication but I think that is OK: > -#include > +/*#include */ > +enum rte_intr_mode { > + RTE_INTR_MODE_NONE = 0, > + RTE_INTR_MODE_LEGACY, > + RTE_INTR_MODE_MSI, > + RTE_INTR_MODE_MSIX > +}; > +#define RTE_INTR_MODE_NONE_NAME "none" > +#define RTE_INTR_MODE_LEGACY_NAME "legacy" > +#define RTE_INTR_MODE_MSI_NAME "msi" > +#define RTE_INTR_MODE_MSIX_NAME "msix" > >> - rte_pci_dev_features.h >> \- rte_pci_dev_feature_defs.h >> - rte_kni_common.h >> \- rte_common.h >> >> Are you sure? >> >> >