[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 09/11] tile: initial TILE-Gx support.

2015-06-22 10:03, Cyril Chemparathy: > On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:00:44 +0200 > Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > > Not sure it makes sense to have different library names. > > > > Why not renaming all to "dpdk"? > > > > > > This config doesn't seem to be getting used anywhere. Maybe just > > > get

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 09/11] tile: initial TILE-Gx support.

2015-06-22 09:54, Cyril Chemparathy: > On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:39:07 +0200 > Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBNAME="tile_dpdk" > > > > Not sure it makes sense to have different library names. > > Why not renaming all to "dpdk"? > > This config doesn't seem to be getting used anywh

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 09/11] tile: initial TILE-Gx support.

2015-06-19 12:15, Cyril Chemparathy: > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBNAME="tile_dpdk" Not sure it makes sense to have different library names. Why not renaming all to "dpdk"?

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 09/11] tile: initial TILE-Gx support.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:00:44 +0200 Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > Not sure it makes sense to have different library names. > > > Why not renaming all to "dpdk"? > > > > This config doesn't seem to be getting used anywhere. Maybe just > > get rid of it globally? > > No it's used in mk/ direct

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 09/11] tile: initial TILE-Gx support.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:39:07 +0200 Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > +CONFIG_RTE_LIBNAME="tile_dpdk" > > Not sure it makes sense to have different library names. > Why not renaming all to "dpdk"? This config doesn't seem to be getting used anywhere. Maybe just get rid of it globally?

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 09/11] tile: initial TILE-Gx support.

This commit adds support for the TILE-Gx platform, as well as the TILE CPU architecture. This architecture port is fairly simple due to its reliance on generics for most arch stuff. Change-Id: I809fcf740e25ba5976a6b7736c1673515338cf80 Signed-off-by: Cyril Chemparathy --- config/defconfig_tile-t