From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83117CD8 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:24:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2863420A7B; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:24:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:24:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=Utb8H1B0vvfBiC2l/W4TtSNwhV aeaXmKyIUsQfo3pKM=; b=DZU5Cig5MhoPrecC9koP9vbgMGJEtBcdaoMGODP0Ig pPD8qv8myhaKS0ukYeSIZCnp1WWCvxEoQru0gZgmUQynR5zlhK4OJnwixP/WbMf/ KWw12hyX8R+zfw/t6/Zp1liuROHelidzOPIuIXCmw8eKskmFUG5G1BCJHFU0hQaB M= 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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=Utb8H1 B0vvfBiC2l/W4TtSNwhVaeaXmKyIUsQfo3pKM=; b=FZRqJFdpm8ftO0VdCSk5Th 03k/hpO1+lGc8Ua85EOOj+2Lb0n2dqX1YldEdaNb+9L0AX2+ZnuGsr7x1BTxqJTt yVgtst3zTDZQ7/0xs6TlPLyarfH/ib1mZR/9Eri9uk+rtpEsO3OuqMGOouHHylVK iMbDyAwnsQn+OEOS4Y9v3zULnQnygkmP6iah9WPmSHhRHVY0RKMpO+qQnMeu5PkX exFfN8pPwMKay9Y/ik97uCYRtFmQLdHZnemD4tVE07WF7sZm+FcBoNStNKSNxdYU gZX6Z6TjqN1TXlkfXwKrwuWGuSjxapqY+PHhJmHe3pvUAOMSWyUdqYTSxwkyRGeQ == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (unknown [37.168.79.178]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 698947FAC6; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:24:21 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Olivier MATZ , Ivan Boule Cc: dev@dpdk.org, john.mcnamara@intel.com Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:23:56 +0100 Message-ID: <23246243.WUkuQapCU8@xps> In-Reply-To: <20171115081327.gzr2rzhpftcu5hn2@platinum> References: <1508164067-22952-1-git-send-email-ivan.boule@6wind.com> <44436245.kbII4kygmp@xps> <20171115081327.gzr2rzhpftcu5hn2@platinum> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce API change for ethdev port info 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, 15 Nov 2017 15:24:23 -0000 15/11/2017 09:13, Olivier MATZ: > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:50:55AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 16/10/2017 16:27, Ivan Boule: > > > To help administrative tasks on ports, new per-port information need > > > to be added into the data structure rte_eth_dev_info supplied by the > > > dev_infos_get() function exported by a Poll Mode Driver. > > > > > > See http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-September/074885.html for > > > details. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Boule > > > Acked-by: Olivier Matz > > > --- > > > +* librte_ether: additional fields will be added into the ``rte_eth_dev_info`` > > > + structure in 18.02, breaking the API. These fields will contain: > > > + > > > + - the set of supported link modes, > > > + - the set of advertised link modes, > > > + - the type of port connector, > > > + - autonegotiation enabled or not. > > > > This patch is not accepted in 17.11 for following reasons: > > - it requires at least 3 acks > > - we are not going to break API in 18.02, except maybe for EAL devargs > > - the link mode is redundant with the speed capabilities > > - such fields require work (and time) for every PMD to be fully supported > > - we should discuss more generally which infos are in the scope of this function > > > > Sorry for the short notice, I was waiting for comments and to see if > > other deprecations were sent (or not) for ethdev. > > Thomas, be aware that it's very frustrating to have this kind feedback 9 > weeks after the submission of the RFC, and few days before the release. Yes, sure I know how it can be frustrating and I am sorry about that. I forgot to review the RFC and I forgot to comment this deprecation notice. Then it was pending like other deprecation notices, but no new deprecation notice appeared for 18.02, and nobody did a comment on those patches. So I think it is better to just postpone it for 18.05. Anyway we can comment and work on the RFC in the meantime.