The <stdatomic.h> news is good, thanks!

On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 12:09 PM Omar Cardona <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi *Ben,*
>
>    - Yes, definitely.  C11/C17 stdatomic.h is high on the list.
>    - Our current critical path item for MSVC DPDK support is TLS.
>
>
>
> Hi *Thomas,*
>
>    - I will setup some time next week to discuss alignment and share our
>    proposed MSVC plan.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Ben Pfaff <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 4, 2021 11:15 AM
> *To:* Omar Cardona <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* William Tu <[email protected]>; thomas <[email protected]>; <
> [email protected]> <[email protected]>; ovs-dev <
> [email protected]>; Sergey Madaminov <[email protected]>;
> Kadam, Pallavi <[email protected]>; Ilya Maximets <
> [email protected]>; Test <[email protected]>; Dmitry Kozlyuk <
> [email protected]>; talshn <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH] RFC: netdev-dpdk: Add
> Windows support.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 8:37 AM Omar Cardona <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > > f. With clang support on Windows, can we remove MSVC?
>
> Please no.  We are actively working with the MSVC team to extend support
> for DPDKs dependencies
>
>
>
> Could you get them to implement C11 atomics? The MSVC support for atomic
>
> operations is poor, unless it's changed since I last looked. We could
> remove
>
> quite a bit of rather awful stuff if either MSVC supported the C standard
> or if
>
> OVS dropped support for MSVC.
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to