From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> Received: from mail-wr0-f172.google.com (mail-wr0-f172.google.com [209.85.128.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D90581CB7A for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 5 Apr 2018 14:45:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr0-f172.google.com with SMTP id u46so28200017wrc.11 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:45:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=dKAzXMpg1zcApRW67uqafkE2WZQQSyRMl0WzbHW1JQc=; b=tZ0RyyxWP+QC4a9tVv+iGf5O63NQLtBb+Nw7D2TmSZ2gff1SF0s3njNNgD/oiRtWh2 TThvGCDUcsSGqPIKkkcieX2IVdRCuDB7pJfjouqecJUmNzLQDYPT3XF8gtfzwxe37aT9 q7hq6xS7Ivxfa1b6Rm/Z3Ll2mjfm/DS/+WasR9za3v9NeWUrJivIo9KrZJTILRaSIKcA w+crM9irgnPL/RFmT5eqL9BeEQMJJy8cPFuR2TLRFHW5LkgbfUFPcJjHrJBMOXR2TvPr ZY+EXIrsHiszg/TUY+wYmq1b6l/sCg1NpoafwnYrQFWltDdGAGYo6uNlV9U64t+I0hXg McPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=dKAzXMpg1zcApRW67uqafkE2WZQQSyRMl0WzbHW1JQc=; b=K8kQv9jOdBUJ7wXWKEH0GpObixB93W1ILLbBC3+DXCsxB8Q2Cyy4KMtSnrNU/DpgZg ogewdFHhUJxFum+ZyStZiRSdJMQ/+ezJJfPGz0iy3gc0SvO8+M4cKfHi2NoS3PNcDHdM DSU52Bu6IaAMk8EHViLPWdC9QXfurr+iQQQ94s8cDDMg/P6JWpaODRMfGRXvcUDESMwH 6agq0BBCk70ISgp9Nng5J34ivNfYlJcbLantkKjDDENqZL+t8Y78Z+ZuYmAqnxBL4hpj gvmAdTIFSDrNjE/Zr9bCoHV8DNZtsagJ3CrtqFucVmbysgjd1lJ9Gv92a5W2R9xJ3SNy w41A== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7FikfmHkpr6YqxnAXR+CJNBHGW4oUhIJskCiy6xOvhiznr+o5wh MHB0MRLZkvpsjvZWy4F5xU2rDQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx481GAA/yRc+avfGPCa6gyo/7EZ9MOlwLxv7A4VxnYlYErTQo4AYBTeLHfzQzsr+gD4IQY5S5A== X-Received: by 10.223.196.74 with SMTP id a10mr14700886wrg.190.1522932304527; Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 39sm15483313wry.89.2018.04.05.05.45.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:45:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 14:44:50 +0200 From: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> Message-ID: <20180405124450.GL4957@6wind.com> References: <20180404150312.12304-1-adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> <20180404150312.12304-2-adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> <2170144.NMypU1fd1R@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2170144.NMypU1fd1R@xps> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 01/16] ethdev: update ABI for flow API functions X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 12:45:05 -0000 On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 12:06:10PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 04/04/2018 17:56, Adrien Mazarguil: > > Subsequent patches will modify existing types and slightly alter the > > behavior of the flow API. This warrants a major ABI breakage. > > > > While it is already taken care of for 18.05 (LIBABIVER was updated to > > version 9 by a prior commit), this patch explicitly adds the affected flow > > API functions as a safety measure. > > I don't understand this patch. > > If the API is broken, you must move the function from old block to > the new one. Missed that part, I'll update it. > And it must be done in the patch modifying the function. About that, almost each patch in this series breaks the ABI in its own way. This left me with two options: either updating these functions once and for all and explaining why in a dedicated patch, or updating them in the first patch with an ABI impact, with subsequent patches piggybacking on that change. Unless there's a way to update the map file for each patch that breaks ABI, I think the former is more consistent, but I don't mind if you prefer the latter. What do you suggest? -- Adrien Mazarguil 6WIND