From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96DF1569A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 18:12:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21])
 by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Jul 2015 09:11:58 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,463,1432623600"; d="scan'208";a="763552400"
Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.208.67])
 by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 13 Jul 2015 09:11:56 -0700
Received: by  (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 13 Jul 2015 17:11:54 +0025
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 17:11:54 +0100
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <20150713161154.GA6932@bricha3-MOBL3>
References: <1436571020-16252-1-git-send-email-pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
 <1436573936-15956-1-git-send-email-pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
 <1436573936-15956-2-git-send-email-pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
 <3000440.Zr2t0yRg7U@xps13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3000440.Zr2t0yRg7U@xps13>
Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/7] hash: replace existing hash library
 with cuckoo hash implementation
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 16:12:01 -0000

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 12:29:53AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-07-11 01:18, Pablo de Lara:
> > The main change when creating a new table is that the number of entries
> > per bucket is fixed now, so its parameter is ignored now
> > (still there to maintain the same parameters structure).
> 
> Why not rename the "bucket_entries" field to "reserved"?
> The API of this field has changed (now ignored) so it should be reflected
> without changing the ABI.

Since the hash_create function is itself already versionned to take account of the
new struct parameter, there is no reason to keep the field at all, as far as I can see.
We can just drop it, and let the ABI versionning handle the change.

/Bruce