From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72412A0561; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:31:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52C651D705; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:31:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay0208.mxlogin.com (relay0208.mxlogin.com [199.181.239.208]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA9071D6E0 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:31:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from filter003.mxroute.com ([168.235.111.26] 168-235-111-26.cloud.ramnode.com) (Authenticated sender: mN4UYu2MZsgR) by relay0208.mxlogin.com (ZoneMTA) with ESMTPSA id 17198a4e5640000766.002 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256); Mon, 20 Apr 2020 17:31:15 +0000 X-Zone-Loop: 27fdadcd75e99db397d3ea20ff8669a5a52b951a158f X-Originating-IP: [168.235.111.26] Received: from galaxy.mxroute.com (unknown [23.92.70.113]) by filter003.mxroute.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A088160039; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 17:31:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from irdmzpr01-ext.ir.intel.com ([192.198.151.36]) by galaxy.mxroute.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1jQZqn-0004Ic-Nv; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:04:54 -0400 To: "Trahe, Fiona" , Thomas Monjalon , "Richardson, Bruce" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Kusztal, ArkadiuszX" , Neil Horman , Luca Boccassi , Kevin Traynor , "Yigit, Ferruh" , Akhil Goyal References: <20200318204136.10508-1-arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com> <20200417093129.GA1701@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <147b0819-6dba-7992-488c-2088d0baae75@ashroe.eu> <3220159.VZ3vTMCxA0@thomas> From: Ray Kinsella Autocrypt: addr=mdr@ashroe.eu; keydata= mQINBFv8B3wBEAC+5ImcgbIvadt3axrTnt7Sxch3FsmWTTomXfB8YiuHT8KL8L/bFRQSL1f6 ASCHu3M89EjYazlY+vJUWLr0BhK5t/YI7bQzrOuYrl9K94vlLwzD19s/zB/g5YGGR5plJr0s JtJsFGEvF9LL3e+FKMRXveQxBB8A51nAHfwG0WSyx53d61DYz7lp4/Y4RagxaJoHp9lakn8j HV2N6rrnF+qt5ukj5SbbKWSzGg5HQF2t0QQ5tzWhCAKTfcPlnP0GymTBfNMGOReWivi3Qqzr S51Xo7hoGujUgNAM41sxpxmhx8xSwcQ5WzmxgAhJ/StNV9cb3HWIoE5StCwQ4uXOLplZNGnS uxNdegvKB95NHZjRVRChg/uMTGpg9PqYbTIFoPXjuk27sxZLRJRrueg4tLbb3HM39CJwSB++ YICcqf2N+GVD48STfcIlpp12/HI+EcDSThzfWFhaHDC0hyirHxJyHXjnZ8bUexI/5zATn/ux TpMbc/vicJxeN+qfaVqPkCbkS71cHKuPluM3jE8aNCIBNQY1/j87k5ELzg3qaesLo2n1krBH bKvFfAmQuUuJT84/IqfdVtrSCTabvDuNBDpYBV0dGbTwaRfE7i+LiJJclUr8lOvHUpJ4Y6a5 0cxEPxm498G12Z3NoY/mP5soItPIPtLR0rA0fage44zSPwp6cQARAQABtBxSYXkgS2luc2Vs bGEgPG1kckBhc2hyb2UuZXU+iQJUBBMBCAA+FiEEcDUDlKDJaDuJlfZfdJdaH/sCCpsFAlv8 B3wCGyMFCQlmAYAFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQdJdaH/sCCptdtRAAl0oE msa+djBVYLIsax+0f8acidtWg2l9f7kc2hEjp9h9aZCpPchQvhhemtew/nKavik3RSnLTAyn B3C/0GNlmvI1l5PFROOgPZwz4xhJKGN7jOsRrbkJa23a8ly5UXwF3Vqnlny7D3z+7cu1qq/f VRK8qFyWkAb+xgqeZ/hTcbJUWtW+l5Zb+68WGEp8hB7TuJLEWb4+VKgHTpQ4vElYj8H3Z94a 04s2PJMbLIZSgmKDASnyrKY0CzTpPXx5rSJ1q+B1FCsfepHLqt3vKSALa3ld6bJ8fSJtDUJ7 JLiU8dFZrywgDIVme01jPbjJtUScW6jONLvhI8Z2sheR71UoKqGomMHNQpZ03ViVWBEALzEt TcjWgJFn8yAmxqM4nBnZ+hE3LbMo34KCHJD4eg18ojDt3s9VrDLa+V9fNxUHPSib9FD9UX/1 +nGfU/ZABmiTuUDM7WZdXri7HaMpzDRJUKI6b+/uunF8xH/h/MHW16VuMzgI5dkOKKv1LejD dT5mA4R+2zBS+GsM0oa2hUeX9E5WwjaDzXtVDg6kYq8YvEd+m0z3M4e6diFeLS77/sAOgaYL 92UcoKD+Beym/fVuC6/55a0e12ksTmgk5/ZoEdoNQLlVgd2INtvnO+0k5BJcn66ZjKn3GbEC VqFbrnv1GnA58nEInRCTzR1k26h9nmS5Ag0EW/wHfAEQAMth1vHr3fOZkVOPfod3M6DkQir5 xJvUW5EHgYUjYCPIa2qzgIVVuLDqZgSCCinyooG5dUJONVHj3nCbITCpJp4eB3PI84RPfDcC hf/V34N/Gx5mTeoymSZDBmXT8YtvV/uJvn+LvHLO4ZJdvq5ZxmDyxfXFmkm3/lLw0+rrNdK5 pt6OnVlCqEU9tcDBezjUwDtOahyV20XqxtUttN4kQWbDRkhT+HrA9WN9l2HX91yEYC+zmF1S OhBqRoTPLrR6g4sCWgFywqztpvZWhyIicJipnjac7qL/wRS+wrWfsYy6qWLIV80beN7yoa6v ccnuy4pu2uiuhk9/edtlmFE4dNdoRf7843CV9k1yRASTlmPkU59n0TJbw+okTa9fbbQgbIb1 pWsAuicRHyLUIUz4f6kPgdgty2FgTKuPuIzJd1s8s6p2aC1qo+Obm2gnBTduB+/n1Jw+vKpt 07d+CKEKu4CWwvZZ8ktJJLeofi4hMupTYiq+oMzqH+V1k6QgNm0Da489gXllU+3EFC6W1qKj tkvQzg2rYoWeYD1Qn8iXcO4Fpk6wzylclvatBMddVlQ6qrYeTmSbCsk+m2KVrz5vIyja0o5Y yfeN29s9emXnikmNfv/dA5fpi8XCANNnz3zOfA93DOB9DBf0TQ2/OrSPGjB3op7RCfoPBZ7u AjJ9dM7VABEBAAGJAjwEGAEIACYWIQRwNQOUoMloO4mV9l90l1of+wIKmwUCW/wHfAIbDAUJ CWYBgAAKCRB0l1of+wIKm3KlD/9w/LOG5rtgtCUWPl4B3pZvGpNym6XdK8cop9saOnE85zWf u+sKWCrxNgYkYP7aZrYMPwqDvilxhbTsIJl5HhPgpTO1b0i+c0n1Tij3EElj5UCg3q8mEc17 c+5jRrY3oz77g7E3oPftAjaq1ybbXjY4K32o3JHFR6I8wX3m9wJZJe1+Y+UVrrjY65gZFxcA thNVnWKErarVQGjeNgHV4N1uF3pIx3kT1N4GSnxhoz4Bki91kvkbBhUgYfNflGURfZT3wIKK +d50jd7kqRouXUCzTdzmDh7jnYrcEFM4nvyaYu0JjSS5R672d9SK5LVIfWmoUGzqD4AVmUW8 pcv461+PXchuS8+zpltR9zajl72Q3ymlT4BTAQOlCWkD0snBoKNUB5d2EXPNV13nA0qlm4U2 GpROfJMQXjV6fyYRvttKYfM5xYKgRgtP0z5lTAbsjg9WFKq0Fndh7kUlmHjuAIwKIV4Tzo75 QO2zC0/NTaTjmrtiXhP+vkC4pcrOGNsbHuaqvsc/ZZ0siXyYsqbctj/sCd8ka2r94u+c7o4l BGaAm+FtwAfEAkXHu4y5Phuv2IRR+x1wTey1U1RaEPgN8xq0LQ1OitX4t2mQwjdPihZQBCnZ wzOrkbzlJMNrMKJpEgulmxAHmYJKgvZHXZXtLJSejFjR0GdHJcL5rwVOMWB8cg== Message-ID: <2d0d9511-7e0c-4dc4-8a8e-f274ceb8a676@ashroe.eu> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 18:31:10 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AuthUser: mdr@ashroe.eu Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] cryptodev: version rte_cryptodev_info_get function 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" Our only commitment is to the stability of the v19.11/v20 ABI, until v21. That said, once an ABI migrates from EXPERIMENTAL to v21, it _shouldn't_ be changing. We don't have a strict commitment to the v21 ABI until v20.11. However if v21 is changing across quarterlies (outside of additions) ... something else is wrong. Ray K On 20/04/2020 17:59, Trahe, Fiona wrote: > Gentle reminder that we still haven't come to a consensus about > whether ABI compatibility is required across quarterly releases or not. > See below. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Trahe, Fiona >> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 12:47 PM >> To: Ray Kinsella ; Thomas Monjalon ; Richardson, Bruce >> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX ; Neil Horman >> ; Luca Boccassi ; Kevin Traynor >> ; Yigit, Ferruh ; Trahe, Fiona >> >> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] cryptodev: version rte_cryptodev_info_get function >> >> Hi all, >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ray Kinsella >>> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 11:34 AM >>> To: Thomas Monjalon ; Richardson, Bruce >>> Cc: Trahe, Fiona ; dev@dpdk.org; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX >>> ; Neil Horman ; Luca Boccassi >>> ; Kevin Traynor ; Yigit, Ferruh >>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] cryptodev: version rte_cryptodev_info_get function >>> >>> >>> >>> On 17/04/2020 11:17, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>> 17/04/2020 11:42, Ray Kinsella: >>>>> On 17/04/2020 10:31, Bruce Richardson wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 08:24:30AM +0100, Ray Kinsella wrote: >>>>>>> On 16/04/2020 11:01, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>>>> 16/04/2020 11:51, Bruce Richardson: >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 06:24:19PM +0100, Trahe, Fiona wrote: >>>>>>>>>> 5a. If in 20.05 we add a version of a fn which breaks ABI 20.0, what should the name of the >>> original function be? fn_v20, or fn_v20.0 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In technical terms it really doesn't matter, it's just a name that will be >>>>>>>>> looked up in a table. I don't think we strictly enforce the naming, so >>>>>>>>> whatever is clearest is best. I'd suggest the former. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Each release can have a new ABI. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How many ABI's do we want to support? >>>>>>> >>>>>> It's not how many we want to support, but for me it's a matter of how many >>>>>> do we need to support. If an API is part of the stable set, it can't just >>>>>> drop to being experimental for one or two releases - it's always stable >>>>>> until deprecated. We also shouldn't have a situation where release 20.08 is >>>>>> ABI compatible with 19.11 but not 20.02 and 20.05. >>>>> >>>>> True. Let me say it differently. >>>>> >>>>> Our only commitment is to support v20 - 19.11 >>>>> However you are correct, if something gets committed as v21 in 20.02, in practise should also be >>> there in 20.05+ also. >>>>> Because if it is committed as v21 and not as experimental, it should not be changing once >>> committed. >>>>> >>>>> In answering Thomas, >>>>> I was more commenting on the proliferation of ABI numbers & symbols we need to track in the >>> build. >>>>> With v20, v21 & Experimental we need to keep track of 3. >>>>> If we start allowing quarterly builds to have managed ABI's, it will get confusing. >>>> >>>> I don't remember why we are using intermediate ABI versions >>>> between v20 and v21. >>>> If we can use v21 for new ABI and make sure compatibility is maintained >>>> between all versions from 19.11 to 20.08, I'm fine. >> [Fiona] Here's a hypothetical case, but it illustrates why I don't think there >> should be an expectation to maintain ABI compatibility here. >> Example: in 20.05 add a new info_get_v21() which includes ChaChaPoly. >> In 20.08 add another new algorithm. info_get_v21() return now includes this. >> info_get_v21() will become stable in 20.11 and compatibility must be maintained from then on. >> In the meantime, the fn is not experimental - that wouldn't be appropriate as it was a stable API. >> But an app either wants stability and so should build against 19.11, or if prepared to move up to >> one non-stable-ABI quarterly release should be willing to rebuild for the next non-stable-ABI quarterly >> release. >> I think it's an unnecessary burden to require ABI compatibility across quarterly releases. >> And if required could end up with the version tracking hassle Ray referred to above with fn versions >> of 20.0.1, 20.0.2, 20.0.3, v21, and potentially several versions of same fn. >> >