[dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 3/8] kvargs: adding a module definition file

[Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran]

On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 14:40 +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > It is painful due to the fact that, If it is windows ONLY file then
> > developer need to test on Windows as well as it may break Windows.
> > If it is a common file, at least, it will be tested on one
> > platform.
> > So responsibly wise it is a clean partition between windows eal
> > maintainers vs generic library maintainers.
> > 
> Yes, good point. However, once we get some windows support into the
> main
> repo then there is the requirement not to break that, so some testing
> on
> windows before merge will prove necessary. Hopefully that can be done
> just
> via CI, rather than having maintainers/committers do so manually.
> 
> > > have been submitted over the years which failed shared library
> > > build
> > > because map file updates were forgotten.
> > > 
> > > However, my hope is that down the road we can have the def file
> > > generated from the map file (or potentially vice versa). Perhaps
> > > the
> > > meson python module could be used to allow us to script it a bit.
> > 
> > Make sense. Do we want to support shared lib for Windows for the
> > first
> > version? or Can we live with static lib till we find a proper
> > solution.
> > I do believe the base Windows Helloworld support needs to added
> > this
> > release in main repo and add the subsequent features step by
> > step.  I
> > would treat, shared lib as subsequent feature if it is not clean.
> > 
> Yes, I did consider that possibility. However, turning off shared
> builds
> for windows is more of a hack than adding a definition file, since it
> involves more (temporary) changes to the meson.build for both lib and
> driver.  If I get the chance, I'll see how complicated it might be to
> autogenerate them at build. Otherwise, I'd suggest keeping the .def
> files
> for now, since only 2 libraries are involved, but then we need to
> come up
> with a proper solution before the number of libraries compiled on
> windows
> goes above that initial 2.

I am OK with a short term hack to get Window support for DPDK, Provided
it will be revisited before adding the next .def file.



> 
> /Bruce