I?ve built the DPDK along with code in both C and C++. It works fine as long as 
you get the linkage between the languages correct and make sure that you don?t 
pass C++ headers into files compiled with the C compiler.

I did try building the DPDK itself with the ?g++? compiler (v4.8.4, Ubuntu 
14.04, 64bit), and I wasn?t able to get that working out of the box. I got 
hundreds of warnings, but I didn?t take the time to debug it ? it?s possible 
that a few point fixes in the build system / DPDK code might yield a clean 
compile.

Thanks,


Nick

From: "Wiles, Keith" <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 at 12:04 PM
To: David Aldrich <David.Aldrich at EMEA.NEC.COM>
Cc: "users at dpdk.org" <users at dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Is DPDK compatible with C++11 threads?


On Nov 8, 2016, at 5:12 AM, David Aldrich <David.Aldrich at 
EMEA.NEC.COM<mailto:David.Aldrich at EMEA.NEC.COM>> wrote:
Hi
As a beginner with DPDK, I want to consider how we can convert an existing 
Linux application from using the kernel network stack to using DPDK.
This existing app is multi-threaded, using the C++11 thread, mutex etc. 
classes.  We assign threads to cores by calling pthread_setaffinity_np().
I have looked at the DPDK helloworld application and see that it launches 
threads using the DPDK API:
               /* call lcore_hello() on every slave lcore */
               RTE_LCORE_FOREACH_SLAVE(lcore_id) {
                              rte_eal_remote_launch(lcore_hello, NULL, 
lcore_id);
               }
If we use DPDK, can we retain our existing C++11 threads or are we obliged to 
use the DPDK threading APIs exclusively?

You should be able to use the standard C++11 threads I believe, in DPDK we are 
just using pthreads and set affinity to lock a thread to a core. You can still 
use pthreads in your application.

Perhaps a more basic question is applicable: is DPDK compatible with C++?

I believe building DPDK with C++ code does work,  but I have not tried it 
myself.

Best regards
David
Best regards
David

Regards,
Keith


Reply via email to