From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <keith.wiles@intel.com> Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FF0C7D34 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 16:11:35 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Dec 2017 07:11:34 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.45,395,1508828400"; d="scan'208";a="186304203" Received: from fmsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.206]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Dec 2017 07:11:34 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx118.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.145]) by FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.9.23]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 07:11:34 -0800 From: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com> To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> CC: DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com> Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCHv3 0/4] dpdk: enhance EXPERIMENTAL api tagging Thread-Index: AQHTcrd5aivv4ZcqlkGNjunG2BMGoKNAV6iA Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:11:33 +0000 Message-ID: <6890CBC3-B3E0-4127-B780-FAC5B5267292@intel.com> References: <20171201185628.16261-1-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> <20171211193619.21643-1-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> In-Reply-To: <20171211193619.21643-1-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.254.66.116] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <FAF8C790306A764AA19F79C743D40FDF@intel.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCHv3 0/4] dpdk: enhance EXPERIMENTAL api tagging X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:11:36 -0000 > On Dec 11, 2017, at 1:36 PM, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote: >=20 > Hey all- > A few days ago, I was lamenting the fact that, when reviewing patches I > would frequently complain about ABI changes that were actually considered= safe > because they were part of the EXPERIMENTAL api set. John M. asked me the= n what > I might do to improve the situation, and the following patch set is a pro= posal > that I've come up with. >=20 > In thinking about the problem I identified two issues that I think we > can improve on in this area: One question is how does this effect the ABI map files or does it? If an AP= I is exposed in the map file does it need any type of special indicator on = that API line? It may not make much difference, but I was thinking it could= be an indicator the API is experimental and may not exist. If the new expe= rimental API is included in the map file then it could become a problem for= systems expecting all of the APIs in the map file to be solid. Regards, Keith