21/01/2018 18:34, Stephen Hemminger: > On Sat, 20 Jan 2018 09:44:46 +0100 > Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > > > 20/01/2018 06:18, Patil, Harish: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am seeing below compilation errors in drivers/event/opdl/, this is with > > > cloned latest DPDK (git clone http://dpdk.org/git/dpdk). > > > > > > .. > > > .. > > > /home2/hpatil/e4/jan19-inbox-submit/dpdk/drivers/event/opdl/opdl_evdev_xsta > > > ts.c: In function ‘opdl_xstats_get_names’: > > > /home2/hpatil/e4/jan19-inbox-submit/dpdk/drivers/event/opdl/opdl_evdev_xsta > > > ts.c:89:2: error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in > > > C99 mode > > > for (uint32_t j = 0; j < max_num_port_xstat; j++) { > > > ^ > > > > My compiler does not raise this error. > > What is your compiler? > > > > Anyone to fix it QUICKLY please? today? > > > > Harish, do you think we should revert if not fixed? > > Using declaration in for loop is a C++ thing which was inherited into C99. > Does DPDK require C99 mode?
No DPDK is not generally C99. > Putting loop variables in for() looks better, but the rest of DPDK > doesn't use that style. C99 was forced for this driver as a quick fix. Either the coding style guideline is updated to C99, or this driver must be adapted to the DPDK coding style. I have no strong opinion. Is C99 well supported in all compilers we want to use (including Windows)?
