DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>
To: "Wojciech Żmuda" <woz@semihalf.com>,
	"Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] af_packet: make the device detachable
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 11:43:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56D5645D.3050304@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAaY-j=xTa2RwZxgikYX54VSz2b_g89egTqo9dJWBHg5MQ88tw@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/29/2016 08:22 PM, Wojciech Żmuda wrote:
> Hi Bernard,
>
>> Does making   rte_pmd_af_packet_devinit local result in an ABI breakage?
> If someone uses it in their app, they'll be forced to change it.
> However, as this function is not intentionally public and there is API
> to create devices that finally calls rte_pmd_af_packet_devinit(), I'm
> not sure if any special caution is needed here.

Yeah this is a bit of a gray area. Strictly speaking it certainly is an 
ABI break, but given that the function is documented as internal-only 
and there's a proper, public way to create the device, there's no good 
excuse for anybody to be using it. I think its okay to remove without 
going through the deprecation process.

>
>> Should the DPDK_2.0 structure be kept and a DPDK_2.3 structure added?
> Should it be just `DPDK_2.3 { local: *} DPDK_2.0`? Doesn't inheritance
> of DPDK_2.0 make the symbol also global in 2.3?

Since there are no symbols being exported I dont see any point in 
changing the version, just drop the accidentally exported symbol from 
the 2.0 definition.

	- Panu -

>> A deprecation notice may need to be added to the doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst  file.
> As far as I understand, deprecation.rst is used to announce something
> will be removed in the future release. Changes already done should be
> moved from deprecation.rst to the release's .rst file. At least, this
> is what I see in commit logs. If this change should be announced in
> deprecation.rst, does this mean there should be another patch in the
> future (after 2.3 release?) making this function static? And that
> future patch will add DPDK_2.3 structure in the map file?
>
> Thank you for your time,
> Wojtek
>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-01  9:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-11 16:37 Wojciech Zmuda
2016-02-24 14:08 ` Iremonger, Bernard
2016-02-29 18:22   ` Wojciech Żmuda
2016-03-01  9:43     ` Panu Matilainen [this message]
2016-03-02 11:47       ` Wojciech Żmuda

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=56D5645D.3050304@redhat.com \
    --to=pmatilai@redhat.com \
    --cc=bernard.iremonger@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=woz@semihalf.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).