2015-06-16 23:09, Thomas Monjalon:
> 2015-05-27 13:45, Simon Kagstrom:
> > /proc/version_signature is the version for the host machine, but in
> > e.g., chroots, this does not need to match that DPDK is built for. Use
> > utsrelease.h from the kernel sources instead and fake the upload
> > version.
2015-05-27 13:45, Simon Kagstrom:
> /proc/version_signature is the version for the host machine, but in
> e.g., chroots, this does not need to match that DPDK is built for. Use
> utsrelease.h from the kernel sources instead and fake the upload
> version.
Sorry, I don't really understand the proble
On 2015-05-28 12:48, Wodkowski, PawelX wrote:
>>> Please only check if UTS_RELEASE is available on all Ubuntu versions DPDK
>> support.
>>
>> From some digging, it appears it entered the kernel tree in 2006 and
>> moved to include/generated/ in 2009 so I guess that should be fine for
>> DPDK builds
On 2015-05-28 12:05, Wodkowski, PawelX wrote:
>>>
>>> -UBUNTU_KERNEL_CODE := $(shell cut -d' ' -f2 /proc/version_signature | \
>>> -cut -d'~' -f1 | cut -d- -f1,2 | tr .- $(comma))
>>> +UBUNTU_KERNEL_CODE := $(shell echo `grep UTS_RELEASE
>>> $(RTE_KERNELDIR)/include/generate
> -Original Message-
> From: Buriez, Patrice
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 1:07 PM
> To: Wodkowski, PawelX; Simon K?gstr?m; Zhang, Helin; Alexander Guy; Julien
> Cretin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] kni: Use utsrelease.h to determine Ubuntu kernel version
>
> Hi all,
> Pl
Hi all,
Please forgive top reply and bottom disclaimer.
Not sure anyway that this email will reach the mailing list, since I did not
subscribe to it.
I am worried about the removal of: cut -d'~' -f1
It was introduced by Pawel in commit 35170c52d0ae33dc30e69bcf681e5a17168bf11e
http://dpdk.org/brow
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon K?gstr?m [mailto:simon.kagstrom at netinsight.net]
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 12:37 PM
> To: Wodkowski, PawelX; Zhang, Helin; Alexander Guy; Julien Cretin; Buriez,
> Patrice
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] kni: Use utsrelease.h to determi
> >
> > -ifeq ($(shell test -f /proc/version_signature && lsb_release -si
> > 2>/dev/null),Ubuntu)
> > +ifeq ($(shell lsb_release -si 2>/dev/null),Ubuntu)
> > MODULE_CFLAGS += -DUBUNTU_RELEASE_CODE=$(shell lsb_release -sr | tr -
> d .)
> > -UBUNTU_KERNEL_CODE := $(shell cut -d' ' -f2 /proc/version
Hi guys
Could you help to review the code changes where you modified before?
Regards,
Helin
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Kagstrom [mailto:simon.kagstrom at netinsight.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 7:45 PM
> To: dev at dpdk.org; Zhang, Helin
> Subject: [PATCH] kni: Use utsrel
This ugly and fast becoming unmaintainable and ridiculous.
KNI needs to get out of being a bunch of out of tree code chasing the
kernel API tail lights
and become something stable and submitted upstream.
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Simon Kagstrom <
simon.kagstrom at netinsight.net> wrote:
>
/proc/version_signature is the version for the host machine, but in
e.g., chroots, this does not need to match that DPDK is built for. Use
utsrelease.h from the kernel sources instead and fake the upload
version.
Signed-off-by: Simon Kagstrom
Signed-off-by: Johan Faltstrom
---
lib/librte_eal/li
11 matches
Mail list logo
