09/11/2020 14:35, Jerin Jacob: > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 6:29 PM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > > > > 09/11/2020 13:01, Jerin Jacob: > > > Hi @Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > Any specific reason why you removed the static assert from octeontx2. > > > > I have a build failure when cross-compiling for octeontx2.
I was wrong here. > I am trying the below command, I am not able to see any issue > meson build --cross-file config/arm/arm64_octeontx2_linux_gcc > > Are you facing the issue with 32bit? Could you share the steps to > reproduce and gcc version? Oh you're right, the issue was with 32-bit build, sorry for the confusion. > --- a/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c > +++ b/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c > @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ nix_tx_offload_flags(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev) > RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pkt_len) != > offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, ol_flags) + 12); > RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, tx_offload) != > - offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + 2 * sizeof(void > *)); > + offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + 2 * > sizeof(uint64_t)); The actual "fix" is offsetof(struct rte_mbuf, pool) + sizeof(uint64_t) + sizeof(void *) I don't understand the octeontx2 vector code. Please check what is the impact of this offset change. BTW, is 32-bit build really supported with octeontx2?
