[v14,1/9] lib: build libraries that testpmd depends on

  Enable building libraries that testpmd depends on for Windows

Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@linux.microsoft.com>
---
 lib/meson.build | 7 +++++++
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
  

2021-06-23 15:34 (UTC-0700), Jie Zhou:
> Enable building libraries that testpmd depends on for Windows
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@linux.microsoft.com>
> ---
>  lib/meson.build | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/meson.build b/lib/meson.build
> index 4a64756a68..1673ca4323 100644
> --- a/lib/meson.build
> +++ b/lib/meson.build
> @@ -76,8 +76,15 @@ if is_windows
>              'ethdev',
>              'pci',
>              'cmdline',
> +            'metrics',
>              'hash',
> +            'timer',
> +            'bitratestats',
>              'cfgfile',
> +            'gro',
> +            'gso',
> +            'latencystats',
> +            'pdump',
>      ] # only supported libraries for windows
>  endif
>  

Acked-by: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com>

Future note:
Bruce, IIUC, the order in the list matters for build speed.
Should we consider using `build = false` for libraries, like it's done for
drivers? So that we don't need to maintain two lists.
  

On 6/24/21 1:34 AM, Jie Zhou wrote:
> Enable building libraries that testpmd depends on for Windows
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@linux.microsoft.com>

Why are two a bit difference Signed-off-by used in these
patches? Can we drop the first one and keep the second one
which matches E-mail From?
  

On 6/28/21 1:01 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 6/24/21 1:34 AM, Jie Zhou wrote:
>> Enable building libraries that testpmd depends on for Windows
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@microsoft.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@linux.microsoft.com>
> 
> Why are two a bit difference Signed-off-by used in these
> patches? Can we drop the first one and keep the second one
> which matches E-mail From?

In fact looking at git log I see both E-mail addresses
present, but it looks like the first one (w/o linux.) is
used more often.
  

On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 01:35:09PM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 6/28/21 1:01 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> >On 6/24/21 1:34 AM, Jie Zhou wrote:
> >>Enable building libraries that testpmd depends on for Windows
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@microsoft.com>
> >>Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@linux.microsoft.com>
> >
> >Why are two a bit difference Signed-off-by used in these
> >patches? Can we drop the first one and keep the second one
> >which matches E-mail From?
> 
> In fact looking at git log I see both E-mail addresses
> present, but it looks like the first one (w/o linux.) is
> used more often.

yes, the CI system rejects the patch without the first because it
doesn't match the original commit. it also rejects without the second
because it needs to match the dev email list subscriber mail so both
have been provided to pass CI.

i think future patches submitted won't be an issue because git local
config for the dpdk clone has been changed to match the second which is
also the subscription mail but changing the config doesn't re-write
the history on the commits (and it shouldn't).
  

On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 07:10:01AM -0700, Tyler Retzlaff wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 01:35:09PM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > On 6/28/21 1:01 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > >On 6/24/21 1:34 AM, Jie Zhou wrote:
> > >>Enable building libraries that testpmd depends on for Windows
> > >>
> > >>Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@microsoft.com>
> > >>Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou <jizh@linux.microsoft.com>
> > >
> > >Why are two a bit difference Signed-off-by used in these
> > >patches? Can we drop the first one and keep the second one
> > >which matches E-mail From?
> > 
> > In fact looking at git log I see both E-mail addresses
> > present, but it looks like the first one (w/o linux.) is
> > used more often.
> 
> yes, the CI system rejects the patch without the first because it
> doesn't match the original commit. it also rejects without the second
> because it needs to match the dev email list subscriber mail so both
> have been provided to pass CI.
> 
> i think future patches submitted won't be an issue because git local
> config for the dpdk clone has been changed to match the second which is
> also the subscription mail but changing the config doesn't re-write
> the history on the commits (and it shouldn't).

Yes, the first one was originally manually added due to some CI warning. 
Double checked git config on local dpdk clone and ensured the user.email 
matches the second one. Will remove the first one in V15 and investigate 
if CI still complains.

Thanks.