On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 10:10:57AM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 4/30/2024 9:57 PM, Patrick Robb wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 4:13 PM Mattias Rönnblom <hof...@lysator.liu.se > > <mailto:hof...@lysator.liu.se>> wrote: > > > > On 2024-04-30 15:52, Patrick Robb wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 3:46 AM Mattias Rönnblom > > <hof...@lysator.liu.se <mailto:hof...@lysator.liu.se> > > > <mailto:hof...@lysator.liu.se <mailto:hof...@lysator.liu.se>>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > It would be great if the unit test suite (app/test/*) was > > compiled (and > > > run) using a C++ (C++11) compiler as well. At least, if such > > >is available. > > > > > > > > > Sure, the UNH Lab can try this. > > > > > > > > > With the current state of affairs, header file macros or > > functions are > > > not verified to be functional (or even valid) C++. > > > > > > "C is a subset of C++", which was never true, is becoming > > >less and less so. > > > > > > If all unit tests aren't valid C++, maybe one could start > > >with > > an "opt > > > in" model. > > > > > > > > > Okay, so basically run the fast-test suite, record all that don't > > pass, > > > submit a bugzilla ticket stating which unit tests are not valid > > > on a certain c++ compiler, then bring CI Testing online using the > > > valid subset of fast-tests. This should work. > > > > > > > Sounds good. > > > > Just to be clear: the above includes extending the DPDK build > > system to build the app/test/dpdk-test binary in two versions: one > > C and one C++, so that anyone can run the C++ tests locally as > > well. Correct? > > > > > > Okay, so now I am understanding this is not yet available. When I > > responded this morning I was figuring that c++ compiler support was > > available and I simply wasn't aware, and that we could quite easily set > > cc={some c++ compiler}, meson would pick it up, and we would be able to > > build DPDK and then run unit tests in this manner in CI testing. > > > > I didn't mean to suggest we would submit patches extending the build > > system to this end. That's probably a little out of scope for what we > > try to accomplish at the Community Lab. > > > > But if the aforementioned build system support is added, of course we > > are willing to add that as a build environment for unit tests and > > report those respective results. > > Does it have to be 'app/test/dpdk-test', why not build examples with C++? > > Examples source codes can be installed with existing build support. > Later we can build these examples with C++, this doesn't require any > update in build system. > Reading through the history, I believe the ask here is to have the headers validated for C++ compatibility. We previously added support to "chkincs" for this - we can build chkincs-cpp with g++ as well as a regular C-compiled chkincs binary.
/Bruce
