> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 1:33 AM
> To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; sta...@dpdk.org; vikto...@rehivetech.com;
> bruce.richard...@intel.com; step...@networkplumber.org;
> juraj.lin...@pantheon.tech; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] build: add missing arch define for Arm
>
> 17/12/2021 09:54, Ruifeng Wang:
> > As per design document, RTE_ARCH is the name of the architecture.
> > However, the definition was missing on Arm with meson build.
> > It impacts applications that refers to this string.
> >
> > Added for Arm builds.
> >
> > Fixes: b1d48c41189a ("build: support ARM with meson")
> > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> > ---
> > ['RTE_ARCH_ARMv8_AARCH32', true],
> > + ['RTE_ARCH', 'arm64_aarch32'],
>
> Why not armv8_aarch32?
Thanks for the comments.
Agreed. armv8_aarch32 is consistent with the RTE_ARCH_xx macro above.
>
> [...]
> > dpdk_conf.set('RTE_ARCH_ARMv7', true)
> > + dpdk_conf.set('RTE_ARCH', 'armv7')
> [...]
> > # armv8 build
> > + dpdk_conf.set('RTE_ARCH', 'arm64')
>
> Why not armv8?
>
> What I prefer the most in silicon industry is the naming craziness :)
While armv8 usually refers to one generation of the Arm architecture, arm64 is
more generic for 64-bit architectures.
And what defined for armv8 build is RTE_ARCH_ARM64. So for consistency, arm64
is better?
