On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 9:45 PM Stokes, Ian <[email protected]> wrote: > On 9/26/2019 1:09 PM, David Marchand wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:41 AM Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On 26.09.2019 12:08, Stokes, Ian wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> the dpdk-latest branch has been lagging behind ovs master for a bit. > >>> Now that the OVS 2.12 release is out it seems timely to rebase it on> top > >>> of OVS master and push, note as before this will be a force push> on the > >>> dpdk-latest branch as the rebase on master will change the > >>> commit history. > >>> > >>> I intend to do this today, are there any objections to this? > >> > >> Sounds good to me. Thanks! > >> > >> BTW, last time I tried to build the dpdk-latest branch there was > >> issues with sparse, i.e. some DPDK headers didn't want to build. > >> So, there is a probability that some additional fixes required. > > > > ovs rte_flow.h (sparse header) is out of sync with dpdk master. > > Either we resync it or we remove it :-). > > > > > > I've just pushed the rebase. I can take a look at fixing at the sparse > header for rte_flow.h in the coming days to help fix travis.
Just tested it, got bitten by some build issue related to ovn removal, but I suppose this is because my workdir was already configured. >From scratch, it works fine. Thanks. About sparse and rte_flow.h, just removing include/sparse/rte_flow.h header does the trick. I inserted issues in the rte_flow.h from my compiled dpdk and sparse properly reported them when building ovs. What is the reason for keeping this copy of the file in ovs? -- David Marchand _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
