> -----Original Message----- > From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 9:40 AM > To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; Bruce Richardson > <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; > Juraj Linkeš <juraj.lin...@pantheon.tech> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: Do not require processor information > > On 2023/04/17 16:41, Ruifeng Wang wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> > >> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2023 8:42 PM > >> To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; Bruce Richardson > >> <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> > >> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: Do not require processor information > >> > >> DPDK can be built even without exact processor information for x86 > >> and ppc so allow to build for Arm even if we don't know the targeted > >> processor is > unknown. > > > > Hi Akihiko, > > > > The design idea was to require an explicit generic build. > > Default/native build doesn't fall back to generic build when SoC info is > > not on the list. > > So the user has less chance to generate a suboptimal binary by accident. > > Hi, > > It is true that the suboptimal binary can result, but the rationale here is > that we > tolerate that for x86 and ppc so it should not really matter for Arm too. On > x86 and ppc > you don't need to modify meson.build just to run dts on a development machine.
What modification do you need for a development machine? I suppose "meson setup build -Dplatform=generic" will generate a binary that can run on your development machine. > > Regards, > Akihiko Odaki
