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 85ACEA0548; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 13:59:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583B3411C9; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 13:59:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C05E3411A4 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 13:59:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DCA13200A2A; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 08:59:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 04 Nov 2021 08:59:24 -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=fm2; bh= KYAS7Y8YUYxnBNB41F2mwNuL8o2d4qJXrW5Y/7MfTLI=; b=QKxwGWEPMrDQPbiS T/M5RXF4+wjOh/Pn5a2cfILHjMLapYAmzqs326z8tpzswGxzTznjo3p8GV0bS/dx gSzBTdj+/4XSwwMSupUvaoaimwMe/+bWLqFlmbIIs+cY7VUAJywdpbnykuWXS9sg TLHkHvw8/Kw8msobTjPnOQFk3ZGZKQd31OFIPys+5ZR8+amXYTVIhp+0x6Laus+D Xov9ci51Gj7nTimAZgLw+16d/ETPtMJaGSFx/pvTDlNynNOaPNZIaKswofXgdr1m pZEEoxz98nLPcmYQ37wyGrYFR/MKOYFdGNWoLaZiwhqLz2AHXfLoyrJqxtwM1IHI jtz/zQ== 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=fm1; bh=KYAS7Y8YUYxnBNB41F2mwNuL8o2d4qJXrW5Y/7MfT LI=; b=FDPxp1u0uDBPKPifA9JAOcGbS6opVIYGw7fxtIAPxgzUYzzCIQS6IP10p BLU/WO7guc+x4XP4pLGlwnx6lIHO9+HqB/AITyoKTECvoioejQnrw+rpdjdobR5w dZsUAAPGGZNkermmQAvZJ/Jh97YPbIanJojFo7hA8OySPXnWoZKZkQd8/wKAjgwU LFXtt6y/TKt7V8c4xWrnuyOJ3jo14/T+Xoh5OGSWcWW0VJ0OlUGJFQjh07vZXnYv l4FkUwEkMRcXqQZSiDRfdkWelDCFa0m2pnogwghKEFdcnFOjQQ/HP5MYnNhuWcKL 79N7rylecdQit5Cb6lzRR0+kBlYaw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddrtdeggdegvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdejueei iedvffegheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 08:59:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Andrew Rybchenko , Ferruh Yigit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Stephen Hemminger , David Marchand , Olivier Matz Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2021 13:59:19 +0100 Message-ID: <2611380.4jmpmGm5TL@thomas> In-Reply-To: <36cd56b2-2388-7924-a10f-9b5c05242d64@intel.com> References: <20211102234434.2639807-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <20211103224835.3407994-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <36cd56b2-2388-7924-a10f-9b5c05242d64@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ethdev: mark old macros as deprecated 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" 04/11/2021 12:03, Ferruh Yigit: > On 11/3/2021 10:48 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > Old macros kept for backward compatibility, but this cause old macro > > usage to sneak in silently. > > > > Marking old macros as deprecated. Downside is this will cause some noise > > for applications that are using old macros. > > > > Fixes: 295968d17407 ("ethdev: add namespace") > > > > Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit > > Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger > > Hi Thomas, Andrew, > > What do you think about marking old macros as deprecated? > > This will cause warning in application code that is using > old macros, but shouldn't fail their build (unless -Werror > is issued). It looks to be the right thing to do. I wonder whether we could wait 22.02 to apply it, so users of LTS are not annoyed by it.