From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1686AA05D3 for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:49:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793411B3EC; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:49:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pl1-f170.google.com (mail-pl1-f170.google.com [209.85.214.170]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 935631B3DA for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:49:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pl1-f170.google.com with SMTP id t16so5944596plo.0 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:49:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ROfWOiPe/HmfGJKxc8w5WvnfI+HgbhyVpvZSUB8tbsc=; b=hIOLSrk/TTXddLqR2vLJ+FOvPgcB1kE2FlmYdXXEfeFHAB6vjGAJSdAPa5PQszJvOu 5LvRtK9SYSQufnemMjoTiYviOnovcGFvQkUxmmCYSUdyG/3ussKMiHM1zdVT7D804oZq lZ+B9gkjWOh1/ykGZdUDbsnuWTVHS/dSB/dZPEsIJWOaxCwaKQTxkIJOMCjT/xyBXpoQ SyB/dUHE+1NL3ONLKEsst8ILdOp/5lP9QEguqsS3oLUuvU08AxTV7uPPSbMc1OIxwatD ywbnruv0ndRbCrbJ79DxbKhFbuB+UcMnNSFnrBfoLNRMpz889RORbZHLCSQaD5gKQAiE 5Fog== 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:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ROfWOiPe/HmfGJKxc8w5WvnfI+HgbhyVpvZSUB8tbsc=; b=rnJNqTZJn0OOL96EwdIggqxB8BV//Rb/3SX3+1tnMqYV6T7kYGmJ94PDdgut/bVxHU CBRBLuKEWdgoIM8IOKLTxSf1l/XdwO6TLecvsHiywSYfcaGX8w18/TNwI/PnXSQ2tndk IJBSf6M3fdeP8mg2uElPT0+vmXljmq6qe/sGR3d/yxIsqBcCYwBttjZVouEgvsPrvIzW GW2qqcxnL3jV2vqmbIARn3GcsjS/Tv+hkNHYyiX3YARNNKEHYqsdv2/KlMYyZsMP8iWy KVwcT9/R22l4Umk/XY7g7sCqMBRtG7oyLL1+dP2aVa9UJaCV0mhrYbGIWOFyAeFaihdf ZqOg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUz/Un+SrGocMGadgG4v+r2G5xunkalCiV785tpUPO7gdva3hih 2cfO8tw97uxMj0v9saKs7d+KUg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwTz7Poa8+kUlHVHJoNys4mZWYa0WR00H3OX4OTimsIVF9iyLykn0IyEzSyPpcxeU4XMclskg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8ecc:: with SMTP id x12mr20785447plo.0.1555944576144; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.lan (204-195-22-127.wavecable.com. [204.195.22.127]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n21sm51013566pfb.42.2019.04.22.07.49.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:49:33 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> Cc: Mattias =?UTF-8?B?UsO2bm5ibG9t?= <mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com>, dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20190422074933.74bc4c4d@xps13.lan> In-Reply-To: <20190422113420.GA22056@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> References: <20190419212138.17422-2-mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com> <20190422113420.GA22056@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2 1/2] eal: replace libc-based random number generation with LFSR 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://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Message-ID: <20190422144933.21-dxbo1QGu92lh4Uwudd-k-6ed1zJvsTzP4N1BHehY@z> On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:34:20 -0400 Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote: > > + > > +uint64_t __rte_experimental > > +rte_rand(void) > Do you really want to mark this as experimental? I know it will trigger the > symbol checker with a warning if you don't, but this function already existed > previously and was accepted as part of the ABI. Given that the prototype hasn't > changed, I think you just need to accept it as a non-experimental function Agree with Neil. Don't mark existing functions as experimental.