[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix static build link ordering
thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com
Fri Jan 13 16:53:46 CET 2017
2017-01-13 08:51, Jerin Jacob:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 03:27:30PM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > On 1/12/2017 1:58 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:26:08AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > >> 2017-01-12 13:16, Jerin Jacob:
> > >>> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_SHARED_LIB),y)
> > >>> _LDLIBS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_PMD) += -lrte_pmd_ixgbe
> > >>> +endif
> > >>
> > >> _LDLIBS is an internal variable of rte.app.mk.
> > >> Please could you check that there is no issue when using LDLIBS instead
> > >> of _LDLIBS?
> > >
> LDLIBS is not helping the situation as LDLIBS comes before the _LDLIBS-y
> mk/rte.app.mk:LDLIBS += $(_LDLIBS-y) $(CPU_LDLIBS) $(EXTRA_LDLIBS)
> But moving to EXTRA_LDLIBS looks OK.But it has to be under CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_PMD
> Thomas, Ferruh
> Let me know if you have any objection on below mentioned diff
> -ifeq ($(CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_SHARED_LIB),y)
> -_LDLIBS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_PMD) += -lrte_pmd_ixgbe
> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_PMD),y)
> +EXTRA_LDLIBS += -lrte_pmd_ixgbe
You need to keep the shared lib check.
Anyway, EXTRA_LDLIBS should be reserved to users and not used in a Makefile.
I prefer your initial patch using _LDLIBS.
Any objection to merge initial proposal?
More information about the dev