On 12/10/2014 11:02 AM, Zhang, Helin wrote: > Hi Jincheng > > Did you attach anything? I can see the text only. > Could you forward your patch mail to me directly? Thanks a lot!
Hi Helin, I indeed ever saw one patch that was similar this one :) but not sure if it is post by Jincheng. You can go through patchwork to have a look. Thanks, Michael > Regards, > Helin > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jincheng Miao [mailto:jmiao at redhat.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 10:55 AM >> To: Zhang, Helin; dev at dpdk.org >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] igb_uio: kernel version check for using >> kstrtoul >> or strict_strtoul >> >> Here is my patch for it, and it also resolves issue of pci_num_vf() >> definition. >> >> And I will send V3 for a while. >> >> >> On 12/10/2014 10:38 AM, Helin Zhang wrote: >>> strict_strtoul() was just a redefinition of kstrtoul() for a long >>> time. From kernel version of 3.18, strict_strtoul() will not be >>> defined at all. A compile time kernel version check is needed to >>> decide which function or macro can be used for a specific version of >>> kernel. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Helin Zhang <helin.zhang at intel.com> >>> --- >>> lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/igb_uio/igb_uio.c | 4 ++++ >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/igb_uio/igb_uio.c >>> b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/igb_uio/igb_uio.c >>> index d1ca26e..2fcc5f4 100644 >>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/igb_uio/igb_uio.c >>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/igb_uio/igb_uio.c >>> @@ -83,7 +83,11 @@ store_max_vfs(struct device *dev, struct >> device_attribute *attr, >>> unsigned long max_vfs; >>> struct pci_dev *pdev = container_of(dev, struct pci_dev, dev); >>> >>> +#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(3, 2, 0) >>> if (0 != strict_strtoul(buf, 0, &max_vfs)) >>> +#else >>> + if (0 != kstrtoul(buf, 0, &max_vfs)) #endif >>> return -EINVAL; >>> >>> if (0 == max_vfs) >
