On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 5:08 PM Konstantin Ananyev
<konstantin.anan...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Right now we define dummy version of rte_acl_classify_avx2()
> when both X86 and AVX2 are not detected, though it should be
> for non-AVX2 case only.
>
> Fixes: e53ce4e41379 ("acl: remove use of weak functions")
> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>
> ---
> lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.c b/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.c
> index 777ec4d340..715b023592 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.c
> @@ -16,7 +16,6 @@ static struct rte_tailq_elem rte_acl_tailq = {
> };
> EAL_REGISTER_TAILQ(rte_acl_tailq)
>
> -#ifndef RTE_ARCH_X86
> #ifndef CC_AVX2_SUPPORT
> /*
> * If the compiler doesn't support AVX2 instructions,
> @@ -33,6 +32,7 @@ rte_acl_classify_avx2(__rte_unused const struct rte_acl_ctx
> *ctx,
> }
> #endif
>
> +#ifndef RTE_ARCH_X86
> int
> rte_acl_classify_sse(__rte_unused const struct rte_acl_ctx *ctx,
> __rte_unused const uint8_t **data,
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Reviewed-by: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>
--
David Marchand
