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 10BA04240D; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 15:12:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0F66400D6; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 15:12:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B414003F for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 15:12:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF1932007D7; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:12:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:12:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1674051158; x= 1674137558; bh=z0LatGfyvMwv3KEch8Un4MD87RvGOdqTGpuGcXtFwts=; b=V A2ZAh3nobZ2rwP+rVlgFI3fl9HUHgU6Sn50oa89VfTYsmMvZpNRzo72XMmzMw5uH mw9LiwwVU8C3c3lL3Hv4sxsk+nSkOBk5d/APWksulfINbse4RYvn5UMClKEl9G3Z rhNmIx4QSpQGCLVSzkBML0os397qcWFwKAJ545CqM4kfUjp8UHEvhUMbmpR19GDi 67cGf0aNXSqTEk3IhJoZ7lYFc2eRqhFXHThMwCj5gj9XfVej6b3qHPNCL8D7iLW9 V0vBWWWX2HPqmSQZg+2ZzaizAGgSuHfago1FVbqqRruaCB9nVEzHClo9vVekVBJP cUvampPrAnwCcpQAayPaA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1674051158; x= 1674137558; bh=z0LatGfyvMwv3KEch8Un4MD87RvGOdqTGpuGcXtFwts=; b=J 5gmeebi5DLewQz4zJhHNnJ+R4tq4UM5nIysfpu8p90yCG2qiyfeZcsPwvTlkCQjy P26lruL/PvwZuXy7lcn/3CsIVzOcB5zikG3q9MYGz3nuldanPUpHwAMgm5rIQN8D 11GibTruyWa3S/7WJlxp1epWDSLz/oauf9dCrOlKkY1n619hMLGNB8qXuYaU4A1H ZFt8YY+fCp5NkUeLrFvQQ7bs3m8ruQklXFMASMLtKz1gc4F7RdHD3xMaauL8mTIW 2bVShLvKn1FWzilTu5cgme3Jazd5Rl8m7IxKHRR8dEwNnny6Adkohd7adQQpkGXI 4P0dylx78m12XSOFITg7g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedruddtkedgieduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthhqredttddtjeenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeegtddtleejjeegffekkeektdejvedtheevtdekiedvueeuvdei uddvleevjeeujeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:12:37 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "lihuisong (C)" , Ferruh Yigit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru, liudongdong3@huawei.com, huangdaode@huawei.com, fengchengwen@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 0/5] app/testpmd: support mulitple process attach and detach port Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 15:12:36 +0100 Message-ID: <3044549.6YUMPnJmAY@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20220825024425.10534-1-lihuisong@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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 11/01/2023 11:46, Ferruh Yigit: > On 1/11/2023 10:27 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > On 1/11/2023 12:53 AM, lihuisong (C) wrote: > >> =E5=9C=A8 2023/1/11 0:51, Ferruh Yigit =E5=86=99=E9=81=93: > >>> Hi Huisong, > >>> > >>> I haven't checked the patch in detail yet, but I can see it gives some > >>> ABI compatibility warnings, is this expected: > >> This is to be expected. Because we insert a device state, > >> RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED, > >> before RTE_ETH_DEV_ATTACHED for resolving the issue patch 2/5 mentione= d. > >> We may have to announce it. What do you think? > >=20 > > If there is an actual ABI break, it can't go in this release, need to > > wait LTS release and yes needs deprecation notice in advance. > >=20 > > But not all enum value change warnings are real break, need to > > investigate all warnings one by one. > > Need to investigate if old application & new dpdk library may cause any > > unexpected behavior for application. > >=20 >=20 > OR, appending new enum item, `RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED`, to the end of the > enum solves the issue, although logically it won't look nice. > Perhaps order can be fixed in next LTS, to have more logical order, but > not quite sure if order worth the disturbance may cause in application. It is a state with a logical order, so it would be nice to be able to do if (state > RTE_ETH_DEV_ALLOCATED) but given there is RTE_ETH_DEV_REMOVED later in the enum, not sure it is us= eful.