From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38755A0524; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:17:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DA181BFFE; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:17:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19ED1BFFA for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:17:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF4073D1; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 09:17:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 30 Jan 2020 09:17:50 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=HaJc7VNkAfybDxnLvyZddZRndV8XJ8ktLQ4KUNIpPRI=; b=BBxh3Uuh1Itj NZkmRQtU2Viq3cA6vBC9v6u5buuHc+wGOGHWSYjT/BDcdY3XvytZmKs4xyf3bYHm XDfkLYp7UQmTli5FklJNu83AbnP8FJWWMyB7V+REMk4+NZHNrTwVznBdpMn6D951 50i0XmY6JHpj8aLZNk0hrIW5stckx1U= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=HaJc7VNkAfybDxnLvyZddZRndV8XJ8ktLQ4KUNIpP RI=; b=g5hQ/bkX0DZRD72/RWhX/95YN8iwu5xbzZxvAR0dMHI0adovX6Ce+OhAa 9/lHwmn4D6FdoT7ft4KvOZImgK3eSz7EYCXa9Lz93mmoakfdliaPTfPMTaxDgZlI 6hgqwskH9xOubP68unz3zhGfB1YE3Bc9N8rq/1ovRCvWDqz4RAWWI1dBqgwMUwz5 dcdGR1gvlP6+E7RP76At+uvU2uE7qj+Nn3ixaUCmxSfgaZJKrrprCqgmr8VExOwI Q5PHP3FS23ZfQIPHhXjlkCUb5RVx4ID501be4dcoUoKfuHsu+xENtN3GrsAJ85uz QWBtcYHOUJMuJXhhp1DgwBO+jVLHg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrfeekgdeivdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epkeeirddvudefrddvhedurddufedtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghr rghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (lfbn-bor-1-555-130.w86-213.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.213.251.130]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0A6A33060A88; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 09:17:47 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Ferruh Yigit , Luca Boccassi Cc: Neil Horman , Cristian Dumitrescu , Eelco Chaudron , dev@dpdk.org, David Marchand , Bruce Richardson , Ian Stokes , Andrzej Ostruszka Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:17:46 +0100 Message-ID: <1929128.8hb0ThOEGa@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20200129122953.2016199-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <1948601.PIDvDuAF1L@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] meter: fix ABI break due to experimental tag removal 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 30/01/2020 13:57, Luca Boccassi: > On Thu, 2020-01-30 at 13:33 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I disagree with the need of this patch. > > The symbol was experimental, meaning we can change it. > > Removing experimental tag is not an ABI break. > > Hi, > > This symbol change was requested for backport in 19.11.x, and > experimental or not I'm not too keen on backward incompatible changes > to the public interface in an _LTS point release_. The compromise was > to see if we could support both symbols version, which makes the change > backward compatible. > > If you prefer not to have this patch in mainline I'm also fine in > taking it just for the LTS. I agree with you that it is not required > for mainline releases (although nicer for me if it's a backport rather > than a new change). I would like to avoid opening the door for maintaining the experimental ABI in the mainline. Please take it directly in the LTS. The next question is to know whether we really want to have such patch in LTS. Anyway, 19.11.0 has this symbol as experimental. How adding a non-experimental version of the function in 19.11.1 will change the ABI status of the whole 19.11 branch? > > 29/01/2020 17:43, Ferruh Yigit: > > > Duplicated the existing symbol and versioned one as experimental > > > and > > > other as stable. > > > > [..] > > > --- a/lib/librte_meter/rte_meter_version.map > > > +++ b/lib/librte_meter/rte_meter_version.map > > > @@ -20,4 +20,12 @@ DPDK_20.0.1 { > > > rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_color_blind_check; > > > rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_config; > > > rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_profile_config; > > > + > > > } DPDK_20.0; > > > + > > > +EXPERIMENTAL { > > > + global: > > > + > > > + rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_config; > > > + rte_meter_trtcm_rfc4115_profile_config; > > > +};