> -----Original Message----- > From: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 8:10 PM > To: dev@dpdk.org; acon...@redhat.com > Cc: gavin...@arm.com; konstantin.anan...@intel.com > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH 1/3] acl: fix arm argument types > > On Mon, 2019-04-08 at 14:24 -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > --- > > Compiler complains of argument type mismatch, like: > > Can you share more details on how to reproduce this issue? > > We already have > CFLAGS_acl_run_neon.o += -flax-vector-conversions in the Makefile. > > If you are taking out -flax-vector-conversions the correct way to fix will be > use vreinterpret*. > > For me the code looks clean, If unnecessary casting is avoided.
Considering the following patch is part of dpdk.org now. I think, We may not need this patch in benefit to avoid a lot of typecasting. https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=e53ce4e4137974f46743e74bd9ab912e0166c8b1 > > > > > > ../lib/librte_acl/acl_run_neon.h: In function ‘transition4’: > > ../lib/librte_acl/acl_run_neon.h:115:2: note: use -flax-vector- > > conversions > > to permit conversions between vectors with differing element > > types > > or numbers of subparts > > node_type = vbicq_s32(tr_hi_lo.val[0], index_msk); > > ^ > > ../lib/librte_acl/acl_run_neon.h:115:41: error: incompatible type > > for > > argument 2 of ‘vbicq_s32’ > > > > Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <acon...@redhat.com> > > --- > > lib/librte_acl/acl_run_neon.h | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++------------- > > -- > > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > /* > > @@ -179,6 +183,9 @@ search_neon_8(const struct rte_acl_ctx *ctx, const > > uint8_t **data, > > acl_match_check_x4(0, ctx, parms, &flows, &index_array[0]); > > acl_match_check_x4(4, ctx, parms, &flows, &index_array[4]); > > > > + memset(&input0, 0, sizeof(input0)); > > + memset(&input1, 0, sizeof(input1)); > > Why this memset only required for arm64? If it real issue, Shouldn't it > required for x86 and ppc ? >
