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 750991B3B8 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:37:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cpe-2606-a000-111b-405a-0-0-0-188a.dyn6.twc.com ([2606:a000:111b:405a::188a] helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1hJGDV-0003bo-CF; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 07:37:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 07:37:04 -0400 From: Neil Horman To: Mattias =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=F6nnblom?= Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stephen@networkplumber.org Message-ID: <20190424113704.GA560@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> References: <20190419212138.17422-2-mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com> <20190422113420.GA22056@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> <5a7b8741-da7f-7322-e57f-59d00d7bcde2@ericsson.com> <75537445-7cf0-f86a-4052-5ee69c83f7eb@ericsson.com> <20190423113347.GB30923@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> <104362bb-689f-23cb-9cf7-1a2022ea68f2@ericsson.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <104362bb-689f-23cb-9cf7-1a2022ea68f2@ericsson.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-Spam-Status: No 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 11:37:43 -0000 On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 07:13:24PM +0200, Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > On 2019-04-23 13:33, Neil Horman wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 07:44:39PM +0200, Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > > > On 2019-04-22 17:52, Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > > > > On 2019-04-22 13:34, Neil Horman 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll remove the experimental tag and move it into the 19_05 section > > > > (without suggesting it should go into 19.05). That maneuver seems not to > > > > trigger any build warnings/errors. > > > > > > > > > > OK, so that wasn't true. It does trigger a build error, courtesy of > > > buildtools/check-experimental-syms.sh. > > > > > > I can't see any obvious way around it. Ideas, anyone? > > > > > No, we would have to waive it. > > I don't understand. What do you mean? > I mean we have to work around the error, understanding that its not really experimental. My first suggestion would be to make a commit with the symbol as experimental, than add a new commit moving it into the proper section of the version map > > But its pretty clear that This function has been > > around forever, so I think it would be worse to demote it to an experimental > > symbol. The only thing you're doing here is moving it from an inline function > > (which is arguably part of the ABI, even if it never appeared as a symbol in the > > ELF file), to a fully fleged symbol with a new implementation. > > > > I agree it shouldn't be marked experimental. The reason for doing so was to > avoid triggering a build error. > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCC6DA05D3 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:37:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38AFC1B4FE; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:37:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750991B3B8 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:37:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cpe-2606-a000-111b-405a-0-0-0-188a.dyn6.twc.com ([2606:a000:111b:405a::188a] helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1hJGDV-0003bo-CF; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 07:37:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 07:37:04 -0400 From: Neil Horman To: Mattias =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=F6nnblom?= Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stephen@networkplumber.org Message-ID: <20190424113704.GA560@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> References: <20190419212138.17422-2-mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com> <20190422113420.GA22056@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> <5a7b8741-da7f-7322-e57f-59d00d7bcde2@ericsson.com> <75537445-7cf0-f86a-4052-5ee69c83f7eb@ericsson.com> <20190423113347.GB30923@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> <104362bb-689f-23cb-9cf7-1a2022ea68f2@ericsson.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <104362bb-689f-23cb-9cf7-1a2022ea68f2@ericsson.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-Spam-Status: No 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Message-ID: <20190424113704.3J6bZrdzqMQQgrFF-ePl39bG0aMn9aA-hL1oU4MdE_8@z> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 07:13:24PM +0200, Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > On 2019-04-23 13:33, Neil Horman wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 07:44:39PM +0200, Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > > > On 2019-04-22 17:52, Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > > > > On 2019-04-22 13:34, Neil Horman 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll remove the experimental tag and move it into the 19_05 section > > > > (without suggesting it should go into 19.05). That maneuver seems not to > > > > trigger any build warnings/errors. > > > > > > > > > > OK, so that wasn't true. It does trigger a build error, courtesy of > > > buildtools/check-experimental-syms.sh. > > > > > > I can't see any obvious way around it. Ideas, anyone? > > > > > No, we would have to waive it. > > I don't understand. What do you mean? > I mean we have to work around the error, understanding that its not really experimental. My first suggestion would be to make a commit with the symbol as experimental, than add a new commit moving it into the proper section of the version map > > But its pretty clear that This function has been > > around forever, so I think it would be worse to demote it to an experimental > > symbol. The only thing you're doing here is moving it from an inline function > > (which is arguably part of the ABI, even if it never appeared as a symbol in the > > ELF file), to a fully fleged symbol with a new implementation. > > > > I agree it shouldn't be marked experimental. The reason for doing so was to > avoid triggering a build error. >