2016-02-12 12:17, Jerin Jacob: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 12:46:33PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2016-01-29 09:40, Jerin Jacob: > > > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/Makefile > > > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/Makefile > > > +ifneq ($(filter y,$(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM) $(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM64)),) > > > +SYMLINK-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_LPM)-include += rte_lpm_neon.h > > > +else > > > SYMLINK-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_LPM)-include += rte_lpm_sse.h > > > +endif > > [...] > > > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > > > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > > > +#if defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM) || defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM64) > > > +#include "rte_lpm_neon.h" > > > +#else > > > #include "rte_lpm_sse.h" > > > +#endif > > > > Instead of defaulting to x86 SSE, it would be better to replace > > "else" by "elif X86/SSE". > > I suggest using RTE_ARCH_X86 or RTE_CPUFLAG_SSEx. > > Some architectures(tile)[1] are planning to emulate SSE instruction used > in LPM for LPM library support.So that way it makes sense to use SSE as > default.
Not sure it is a great idea to emulate instructions of another arch. > But if anyone has any objections then I can add the check else let > keep in existing way. If Tile wants to use x86 code, it's better to do it explicitly (X86 || TILE). > [1] > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-January/031147.html
