On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 10:01 AM Bruce Richardson
<bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 11:22:42AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 17:00:45 +0100
> > Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Some older compilers e.g. gcc 8.5, do not support overriding
> > > -march=native with another architecture, leading to build warnings such
> > > as reported in Bugzilla (link below). Add a check for that case, and
> > > explicitly add the avx512 flags if necessary.
> > >
> > > Note: it appears that it is only the "native" flag that isn't
> > > overridden, which makes the issue hard to reproduce e.g. using
> > > godbolt.org, or on a modern machine. For example, testing with gcc 8.5
> > > on a haswell machine, using 'native' vs explicit 'haswell':
> > >
> > > gcc -march=native -march=skylake-avx512 -dM -E - < /dev/null | grep
> > > AVX512 | wc -l
> > > 0
> > >
> > > gcc -march=haswell -march=skylake-avx512 -dM -E - < /dev/null | grep
> > > AVX512 | wc -l
> > > 5
> > >
> > > Bugzilla ID: 1736
> > > Fixes: e361ae3f59d3 ("build: reduce use of AVX compiler flags")
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > config/x86/meson.build | 7 ++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/config/x86/meson.build b/config/x86/meson.build
> > > index e2ccfb6d12..0dcc5ddee4 100644
> > > --- a/config/x86/meson.build
> > > +++ b/config/x86/meson.build
> > > @@ -71,8 +71,13 @@ avx512_march_flag = '-march=x86-64-v4'
> > > if not cc.has_argument(avx512_march_flag)
> > > avx512_march_flag = '-march=skylake-avx512'
> > > endif
> > > +# workaround for older compilers, e.g. gcc 8.5 on RHEL 8.
> > > +# if march flag overriding doesn't work, explicitly add flags for AVX512.
> > > +if cc.get_define('__AVX512F__', args: [machine_args, avx512_march_flag])
> > > == ''
> > > + avx512_march_flag = ['-mavx512f', '-mavx512bw', '-mavx512cd',
> > > '-mavx512dq', '-mavx512vl']
> > > +endif
> >
> > RHEL 8.5 reached end of extended support cycle (EOL).
> > Why are we still supporting it?
>
> Folks working for Redhat can answer better than me, but according to [1]
> it's not EOL yet. Also, we support it in DPDK because users are still using
RHEL 8 is not EOL.
--
David Marchand
