From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5DAA48A for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 01:37:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from [107.15.66.59] (helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ebFFQ-00030c-UE; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 19:37:06 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 19:37:04 -0500 From: Neil Horman To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org, john.mcnamara@intel.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <20180116003704.GB15433@neilslaptop.think-freely.org> References: <20180115190545.25687-1-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> <6261725.cSDxTUqfeb@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6261725.cSDxTUqfeb@xps> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-Spam-Status: No Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] checkpatches.sh: Add checks for ABI symbol addition 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: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:37:09 -0000 On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 10:52:25PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 15/01/2018 20:05, Neil Horman: > > Recently, some additional patches were added to allow for programmatic > > marking of C symbols as experimental. The addition of these markers is > > dependent on the manual addition of exported symbols to the EXPERIMENTAL > > section of the corresponding libraries version map file. The consensus > > on review is that, in addition to mandating the addition of symbols to > > the EXPERIMENTAL version in the map, we need a mechanism to enforce our > > documented process of mandating that addition when they are introduced. > > To that end, I am proposing this change. It is an addition to the > > checkpatches script, which scan incoming patches for additions and > > removals of symbols to the map file, and warns the user appropriately > > Thanks for working on this. Sure. > I won't pretend that I understand anything in this awk script :) > Stephen suggested that I clean it up and document it a bit, which is probably a good idea. > I think it would be better to put this code in a new script, > let's say check-symbol-change.sh, and call it in checkpatches.sh. > It would be just moving functions, add your copyright, and list the new > script in your MAINTAINERS section "ABI versioning". Yeah, I can do that. New version in the AM Neil >