From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8494DDE0 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:09:26 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id r141so97870766wmg.1 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:09:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E0wf4fOCR2OK+B7Q5Fj04j1sXD2kobDRt/J/OTPWPho=; b=VYZUc/MxmOeKaCXGMguBOjlMAbJEBBOdrkwrr56/EmnKBTo7WZmQlnOSC/1AUhB3OS A0adhyf2dM9aJCZwW/b2p1C1vjrj50T9Y5XqGNoLtKKbEKtwavQ6c6LnRwZ3dMqIyupg seFi6Ccfzryl6Lv+wqEJtX9CQpOfD0zDS7Lf4JQzPlhfGv/BZEceVgwJh3Sggw2tszXv A+uWMipVF42O1KJHat4mJj73Ni7LXckK1GpB0BW3cVlQhMXQfgAw1cKe1+6+ts16UJub r5VHNqeGRTrnURGtS8o6x9Ep7qhO0V6b/DbF4IgU8ngVcjLbm66+QlGeqcrWUiVlQOag hjqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E0wf4fOCR2OK+B7Q5Fj04j1sXD2kobDRt/J/OTPWPho=; b=S6P4tN8PIvvdySzeZzpY4mqPpY+0XDvbJTU3y2Dan1FCRnFIG3F2LX93jV1FIAAt9f XB8diMmMLzU4KYZHRhIxYKdeOWtYfXUCzlinqSFht+hcS4MBOzrGMuQjk/W7zJcLUaja k0CX8BluRrwsbYxTCiJkLpmDebZvbqJsoDs4b56cZiAgit1qAiVSzHw8sTfkoUWDL/UQ cKBNocgjF8jbTbHN/A2HCgW9YqcoCTvRwi0r0F3xQGFqQzS17aFzvaYWZ0qOmIDK2QP9 YCGF/mD+l2MYykdVAYRzj9C/9hYfWqwWsnMQbtF37a+XaPm7UhzQlu1Lxj7NRlRkrMUe 4qdw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39m6Nk6q12t/KEg6kQ1S1/my8pq/SkLr+iCVPuzLLB3VH2sSy8wnRvL9n4LyQfkKWeBc X-Received: by 10.28.153.139 with SMTP id b133mr18376958wme.93.1487002166256; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:09:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o2sm5905352wmb.28.2017.02.13.08.09.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:09:25 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Richardson, Bruce" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "Wiles, Keith" Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:09:25 +0100 Message-ID: <1593922.H4Bo57569h@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891265274BEE4@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891265274BEE4@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] doc: deprecation notice for ethdev ops? X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:09:26 -0000 2017-02-13 16:02, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > Hi Thomas, > > When a new member (function pointer) is added to struct eth_dev_ops (as the last member), does it need to go through ABI chance process (e.g. chance notice one release before)? > > IMO the answer is no: struct eth_dev_ops is marked as internal and its instances are only accessed through pointers, so the rte_eth_devices array should not be impacted by the ops structure expanding at its end. Unless there is something that I am missing? You are right, it is an internal struct. So no need of a deprecation notice. We must clearly separate API and internal code in ethdev. > My question is in the context of this patch under review for 17.5 release: http://www.dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-February/057367.html. I did not look at it yet. Will do after the release.