From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7214CA0C48; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 15:26:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60C3C4068F; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 15:26:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1D24068B for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 15:26:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8058E5C00FB; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:26:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:26:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= ZIC7L5LnVz8zkqFKP1OnhXDdixgUwJ2BKRCwD68fYqY=; b=oGq+uJ0+Ofs+tVkO 0fYMwvft1h7qWQtNAlsOOzkg/ejJsvjR/oJOd0qnOzIcTLlRgikl4HnalmNnCLZV /XUMBGnFuWQdsOU+kdQKScKuOutFo8a/62KxrySNggv9lSXD7xD/dPA8Xl0a7xnW D3Pc6PN3cS73rDkTSU1Cy2AM7LuuDBS7mXVharxbWxVeHE6MN0pT/8A5hHvwdwn+ cwYrg/V081x07DA9VUvGXkbzW8ory0StbWqOnwSGPqC5XeEmz5wqNAFNi92qrjpd qPNPo0eM+L5QWofhXwRgb2+0c0oSygF1YSp/DXpONvIPZe5h7XG6buhLoG/EDjF7 XRe+1w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=ZIC7L5LnVz8zkqFKP1OnhXDdixgUwJ2BKRCwD68fY qY=; b=tQlANRI5rfluiJSmjOQd6n1euSVBVZuyVOMzyY3VFkQs3T7cuTPJvehLn JCjWfRAFmNqmJ4+7QWW8A+iS9Pe0s68+SKKI5F6tGoYGzZNHHpGL482fk914ofVO hbfMS161zMEm06cve9eQfW9hAwKnrpq9IjKYiZOYKBgZxjpWC7rmavwFxEbAQY6W 3Fzb4XLH2Y5V0Xvf6G1iEKk49b7FbdgaKJ2G7q3uFuOcrIR7yLewg9hc+bwHwVc2 RKsF8JaeEh3P+VRhuA0okA+OQOuC7C/PY2FCaGsbui8MxqpTBP9cA0PGn4AgJIbs F7F63N8Bc8Vdx528PV38eY30I2nqQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrfedvgdeifecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpeffvdffjeeuteelfeeileduudeugfetjeelveefkeejfeeigeehteff vdekfeegudenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdr nhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:26:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Tyler Retzlaff , dev@dpdk.org, anatoly.burakov@intel.com, david.marchand@redhat.com Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 15:26:26 +0200 Message-ID: <2043133.xR68YOe5AU@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20210719150022.249fe1a9@hermes.local> References: <20210713201221.301248-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20210719171534.GC7679@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <20210719150022.249fe1a9@hermes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: fix argument to rte_bsf32_safe X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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" 20/07/2021 00:00, Stephen Hemminger: > On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:15:34 -0700 > Tyler Retzlaff wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 01:12:21PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > The first argument to rte_bsf32_safe was incorrectly declared as > > > a 64 bit value. This function only correctly handles on 32 bit values > > > and the underlying function rte_bsf32 only accepts 32 bit values. > > > This was introduced when the safe version was added and probably cause > > > by copy/paste from the 64 bit version. > > > > there are multiple errors in this family of functions [1] both in usage > > and signatures. we previously discussed rolling all fixes up into a single > > patch and announcing an api break. > > > > a doc patch was submitted as per the process documented for breaking api > > but received no replies [2] > > > > i have a full patch that corrects the whole family if you would like to > > take it instead. contact me offline if you are interested. > > > > 1. http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-March/201590.html > > 2. http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-March/201868.html > > > > the change stand-alone is correct so > > > > Acked-By: Tyler Retzlaff > > Thanks, I think the larger set should go into 21.11 where API/ABI break > would be ok. My bit was all about fixing the bug where current code > breaks C++ users. Shouldn't we have a note in the API changes section of the release notes?