Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce removal of ABIs in PCI bus driver

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

03/08/2021 03:52, Xia, Chenbo:
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > 27/07/2021 10:44, Bruce Richardson:
> > > On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 05:56:17AM +0000, Xia, Chenbo wrote:
> > > > From: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> > > > > On 7/23/2021 8:39 AM, Xia, Chenbo wrote:
> > > > > > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Chenbo Xia
> > > > > >> +* pci: To reduce unnecessary ABIs exposed by DPDK bus driver,
> > > > > "rte_bus_pci.h"
> > > > > >> +  will be made internal in 21.11 and macros/data
> > structures/functions
> > > > > defined
> > > > > >> +  in the header will not be considered as ABI anymore. This change
> > is
> > > > > >> inspired
> > > > > >> +  by the RFC
> > > > > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=17176.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see there's some ABI improvement work on-going and I think it could
> > be
> > > > > part of
> > > > > > the work. If it makes sense to you, I'd like some ACKs.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Acked-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > I am for reducing the public ABI as much as possible. How big will the
> > > > > change
> > > > > be? Is the 'rte_bus_pci.h' used other than './drivers/bus/pci/'?
> > > >
> > > > I don't see big change here. And I am not sure if I understand your second
> > > > question. The rte_bus_pci.h will still be used by drivers (maybe remove
> > the
> > > > rte prefix and change the file name).
> > > >
> > > The file itself will still be exported in some cases, where the end-user
> > > has their own drivers which need to be compiled, so I'd recommend keeping
> > > the rte_ prefix. However, I think making all bus APIs internal-only to DPDK
> > > is a good idea.
> > 
> > I don't understand how it can exported _and_ internal.
> 
> I think we can use the meson option 'enable_driver_sdk'. The first use case is in
> lib ethdev for exporting internal APIs for out-of-tree drivers. For pci bus, I
> think the use case is similar: users who want to build out-of-tree drivers can
> set the option true to export pci header but the structs/functions are marked
> internal. Make sense to you?

I understand the intent.
You are saying an out-of-tree driver is considered internal.
Let's see how it works for real.