On Sat, Aug 05, 2023 at 03:32:37PM -0600, Philip Prindeville wrote: > > > > On Aug 3, 2023, at 2:17 AM, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 03:47:59PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > >> On Wed, 2 Aug 2023 15:49:54 -0600 > >> Philip Prindeville <philipp_s...@redfish-solutions.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I'm trying to come up with some Kconfig logic for OpenWRT packaging to > >>> help users select the right build options for their hardware. > >>> > >>> Most OpenWRT developers typically cross-compile, so we obviously can't > >>> rely on detection on the build host as that's rarely the same as the > >>> target machine. > >>> > >>> Looking in the DPDK repo, I don't see any description of the available > >>> architectures, drivers, etc. and what I had seen previously was (if I > >>> remember) only for x86_64 hardware, and even that I can't seem to locate > >>> again. > >>> > >>> Would it make sense to put some of these definitions into the repo > >>> itself, so that when new drivers are added, that stands out (at least in > >>> the commit logs) and we can capture the permutations of what driver goes > >>> with which SoC on what architecture, etc? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >>> -Philip > >>> > >> > >> DPDK now uses meson which by default builds everything available on the > >> build architecture. > >> There is intentionally no way to disable drivers, you can disable some > >> libraries though. > > > > Actually, we do now support disabling drivers, and also only selectively > > enabling specific ones. See disable_drivers and enable_drivers meson > > options. > > > > To find our different architecture support, I suggest looking in the config > > directory. The subfolders there often contain cross-files for meson for > > building for various architectures. For example, config/arm, contains a > > number of reference files for cross-compiling for different arm platforms. > > > > Regards, > > /Bruce > > > Noticed also that the ARM architecture has configs, but AMD64 seems to be > wide open... just one generic config. > > Is that because some chips, like Xeon-D have on-die NICs, and others like > Xeon-E don't? >
Its just that folks generally don't cross-compile for x86, and also the fact that nobody has ever brought it up before. We have no "native-build" files in DPDK, only cross-files for cross-compilation. However, if there is demand for them no reason we can't store some. /Bruce
