From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD3211D4 for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 11:13:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Oct 2018 02:13:58 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,343,1534834800"; d="scan'208";a="238721639" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.107]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 05 Oct 2018 02:13:53 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 05 Oct 2018 10:13:52 +0100 Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 10:13:52 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org, Neil Horman , Luca Boccassi , Christian Ehrhardt Message-ID: <20181005091351.GA20880@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20181004154306.65867-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <1785611.eL8Z1dKoq2@xps> <56a42359-9ead-7c33-72a3-1d89d56f383c@intel.com> <33456122.koQSlajCb5@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <33456122.koQSlajCb5@xps> Organization: Intel Research and Development Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] config: disable RTE_NEXT_ABI by default 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: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 09:13:59 -0000 On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 05:55:34PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 04/10/2018 17:28, Ferruh Yigit: > > On 10/4/2018 4:10 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 04/10/2018 17:48, Ferruh Yigit: > > >> Enabling RTE_NEXT_ABI means to enable APIs that break the ABI for > > >> the current release and these APIs are targeted for further release. > > > > > > It seems nobody is using it in last releases. > > > > > >> RTE_NEXT_ABI shouldn't be enabled by default. > > > > > > The reason for having it enabled by default is that when you build DPDK > > > yourself, you probably want the latest features. > > > If packaged properly for stability, it is easy to disable it in > > > the package recipe. > > > > My concern was (if this has been used), user may get unstable APIs and without > > explicitly being aware of it. > > I am OK with both defaults (enabled or disabled). > I'd keep it as is. As said, I'm not sure it's being used right now anyway.