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 1DF07A0C41; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:37:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B1440141; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:37:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B91264003C for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:37:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CE885C00DC; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 02:37:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 24 Jun 2021 02:37:23 -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= 7uzGWIUf6cHC2zhWbM4kRXOpSdtMve5wslEsnzUQIlE=; b=XWVvjlysFqioHdCA kIFTx1LAhD9wpisGReVCHAJ7zwhzJ8DENyT/YaJO0y8DZ07+TWsoFFwGQ7QYzHKp 4VXsccX4Uz8MhtvWNTY6D+hK00klhCWLc/+qHHbMABf2uDbb/kONiXT2+IE0hucT 6NZ7WUlazc0l4Cq7WsoZSikzvBuQu3ur/Wseb8qTvRpfjjBYCgrsza8n26pU/yyZ XVq2uWIEE3U5nTc0YjpCnSVgz3HZDRp4jfr6PrUrUdEW44DuIGYBuJcSJ8w916tG ONXzF42LbBdzcz5BMPCDcO0Hjr3/P9JQAY1f6eMe/7g62/PExZEgfSkv2q1tMGjX k994Rg== 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=7uzGWIUf6cHC2zhWbM4kRXOpSdtMve5wslEsnzUQI lE=; b=qtskFypHT86i98WfV9G49y2oy20c9IJ4nIs1GUdhyYFWKoWsmINDWNO1D ps79NtbyneuCGXq5fROPoNyHnr4Gl1HkSA/+db/3eAHNmOFJj2jWNJ0bs3/96aiZ GKWPojCluJTHKuaHtaOIQxm0l0dStOGhOeh+1MnQYoRIheESBI/Ys9Qw1s2BTxel kIMB0V1xFohfhos9gqUYVxHCt9rf39uLlC+gc6SM7ZrQ1+YKKVQZK34XfdTLAuor SQhg8Y3hjvWT22nmoAvMmGgAosoQasxQq4qKF8McS1XcaSsIHlWcOIw6tUVYrEG8 wNQG3H9XoDqUUPtnHWh3VF58AbdTw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrfeeggedguddtfecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej ueeiiedvffegheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 02:37:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Xueming(Steven) Li" Cc: Parav Pandit , "dev@dpdk.org" , Wang Haiyue , Kinsella Ray , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "ferruh.yigit@intel.com" Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:37:19 +0200 Message-ID: <2300002.O0bGQxM10Q@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20210510134732.2174-1-xuemingl@nvidia.com> <2209356.FqHIJRZBcD@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] bus/auxiliary: introduce auxiliary bus 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" 23/06/2021 16:52, Xueming(Steven) Li: > From: Thomas Monjalon > > 23/06/2021 01:50, Xueming(Steven) Li: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > 13/06/2021 14:58, Xueming Li: > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > +++ b/drivers/bus/auxiliary/version.map > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ > > > > > +EXPERIMENTAL { > > > > > + global: > > > > > + > > > > > + # added in 21.08 > > > > > + rte_auxiliary_register; > > > > > + rte_auxiliary_unregister; > > > > > +}; > > > > > > > > After more thoughts, shouldn't it be an internal symbol? > > > > It is used only by DPDK drivers. > > > > > > So users will not be able to compose their own driver and register > > > with auxiliary bus?z > > > > Yes, that's an interesting question actually. > > We can continue with experimental/stable status of driver ABI, but we should invent a new ABI flag like DRIVER, so there is no stability > > policy on such symbol. > > Not quite understand here, why we want to export the function but no ABI guarantee? the api shouldn't change frequently IMHO. Sorry my message was not clear. I am OK to keep "EXPERIMENTAL" in this patch. But in future, we don't want to make driver interface as part of the stable ABI because it makes evolution harder for no good reason: nobody is asking for a stable interface with drivers.