[PATCH 1/2] config/arm: Do not require processor information

[Ruifeng Wang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki at daynix.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 9:40 AM
> To: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang at arm.com>; Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson at intel.com>;
> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes at pantheon.tech>
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; nd <nd at arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: Do not require processor information
> 
> On 2023/04/17 16:41, Ruifeng Wang wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki at daynix.com>
> >> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2023 8:42 PM
> >> To: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang at arm.com>; Bruce Richardson
> >> <bruce.richardson at intel.com>
> >> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki at daynix.com>
> >> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: Do not require processor information
> >>
> >> DPDK can be built even without exact processor information for x86
> >> and ppc so allow to build for Arm even if we don't know the targeted processor is
> unknown.
> >
> > Hi Akihiko,
> >
> > The design idea was to require an explicit generic build.
> > Default/native build doesn't fall back to generic build when SoC info is not on the list.
> > So the user has less chance to generate a suboptimal binary by accident.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> It is true that the suboptimal binary can result, but the rationale here is that we
> tolerate that for x86 and ppc so it should not really matter for Arm too. On x86 and ppc
> you don't need to modify meson.build just to run dts on a development machine.

What modification do you need for a development machine?
I suppose "meson setup build -Dplatform=generic" will generate a binary that can run
on your development machine.

> 
> Regards,
> Akihiko Odaki