From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76FC75688 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 08:24:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2017 23:24:21 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,319,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="1089571546" Received: from tanjianf-mobl.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.255.31.226]) ([10.255.31.226]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2017 23:24:19 -0800 To: Thomas Monjalon , Ferruh Yigit References: <1485243248-27082-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com> <1485243248-27082-4-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com> <66ee7e72-95a3-1e31-278c-b6823168de6c@intel.com> <2816494.kdcLa2jDNL@xps13> Cc: dev@dpdk.org, john.mcnamara@intel.com, yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com, stephen@networkplumber.org From: "Tan, Jianfeng" Message-ID: <15ff5e1c-4f43-7a93-c370-9ebce2159fd4@intel.com> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 15:24:18 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2816494.kdcLa2jDNL@xps13> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] doc: remove ABI changes in igb_uio 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: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 07:24:22 -0000 On 1/31/2017 1:52 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2017-01-24 13:35, Ferruh Yigit: >> On 1/24/2017 7:34 AM, Jianfeng Tan wrote: >>> We announced ABI changes to remove iomem and ioport mapping in >>> igb_uio. But it has potential backward compatibility issue: cannot >>> run old version DPDK on modified igb_uio. >>> >>> The purpose of this changes was to fix a bug: when DPDK app crashes, >>> those devices by igb_uio are not stopped either DPDK PMD driver or >>> igb_uio driver. We need to figure out new way to fix this bug. >> Hi Jianfeng, >> >> I believe it would be good to fix this potential defect. >> >> Is "remove iomem and ioport" a must for that fix? If so, I suggest >> re-think about it. >> >> If I see correctly, dpdk1.8 and older uses igb_uio iomem files. So >> backward compatibility is the possible issue for dpdk1.8 and older. >> Since v1.8 two years old, I would prefer fixing defect instead of >> keeping that backward compatibility. >> >> Jianfeng, Thomas, >> >> What do you think postponing this deprecation notice to next release, >> instead of removing it, and discuss more? >> >> >> And overall, if "remove iomem and ioport" is not a must for this fix, no >> problem to remove deprecation notice. > I have no strong opinion here. > Jianfeng, do you agree with Ferruh? Hi Ferruh & Thomas, I agree wit Ferruh to postpone this deprecation notice. In another thread, we discussed the possibility to fix this problem without the deprecation. But I have no time to verify it in this release cycle. Let's postpone it then. Thanks, Jianfeng