Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] net/mlx: version rdma-core glue libraries

[Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <mleitner@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 12:24:02PM +0100, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 03:29:38PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 02/02/2018 17:46, Adrien Mazarguil:
> > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx4/Makefile
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx4/Makefile
> > > @@ -33,7 +33,9 @@ include $(RTE_SDK)/mk/rte.vars.mk
> > >  
> > >  # Library name.
> > >  LIB = librte_pmd_mlx4.a
> > > -LIB_GLUE = librte_pmd_mlx4_glue.so
> > > +LIB_GLUE = $(LIB_GLUE_BASE).$(LIB_GLUE_VERSION)
> > > +LIB_GLUE_BASE = librte_pmd_mlx4_glue.so
> > > +LIB_GLUE_VERSION = 18.02.1
> > 
> > You should use the version number of the release, i.e. 18.02.0
> > Ideally, you should retrieve it from rte_version.h.
> 
> Keep in mind this only needs to be updated when the glue API gets modified,
> and this "18.02.1" string may remain unmodified for subsequent DPDK
> releases, probably as long as the PMD doesn't use any new rdma-core calls.
> 
> We've already backported this patch to 17.02 and 17.11, both requiring
> different sets of Verbs calls and thus a different version, hence the added
> "18.02" as a starting point. The last digit may have to be modified possibly
> several times between official DPDK releases while work is being done on the
> PMD (i.e. per commit).
> 
> In short it's not meant to follow DPDK's public versioning scheme. If you
> really think it should, doing so will make things more complex in the
> Makefile, which will have to parse rte_version.h. What's your opinion?

What about appending date +%s output to it? It would be stricter and
automated.

  Marcelo