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 97E1AA0548; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 13:39:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78800410D8; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 13:39:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E78F34014F for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 13:39:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583505C01D9; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 07:39:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap22 ([10.202.2.72]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 23 Apr 2021 07:39:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=u256.net; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to:cc :subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=9tnuct2vTUs/xqOp4NznNr1Or0l6kWA FXYLZhgBLwA0=; b=xPhubABZ320vdvIl7WtGldKWoUlICGGO4mjN4SrVvNcnND4 UPWq/5mWww/fVuDKoXcydwpyv9/efposL+aVDeQOSumrKiHcHV4XoALmHhkEiuAo 9tteCS4YqKGbYvWLWMK9OUNYkg4qeYwXayP0X7wkiN4rgUwDZ5oU1Yd7qYr3bsYD mutD3Jm5XVy9M+Nz2cN4nR3FIItORt1VRrASEd3MQY8BbHJZjKM4tLCqQCd8Nt78 2Vf4k6fiVBirkUt/Rsm7SRIudJ06y0kzCiYWiS6oRekll4Vj9AGsVumiDoizStvc cdU394u3ZT5C7w4QALxABc4Z1+PUgMTQlm6LpVQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=9tnuct 2vTUs/xqOp4NznNr1Or0l6kWAFXYLZhgBLwA0=; b=HNSAs7h6/FxV2MR0ujQLON k4cB4VEBnjqzXGUAY9cuJeboNZsYyVEwhqaJoIGg08ds/xk+50LrUaPcZc0sf6lC GhtRlP68PaBPE5CUr86zsj/0LRQQdhlrmXrEd18uQxxZKcFX2RLDO10VKo9usH6B lgHvDdDndZ69fVQNHeeuq6UQWnvBWaDntBWM52dzdHropOSkBYWbonUQs8XwSEBY 3iEWDmepFrOunIa1EzZPdrwUEWJuRk4ByOHkyhxqI9M3T9+F6/Z2ocmEXviEZHAA HhQvi9V5CeSdf/egEy0kDapaFUaoN3VtyI41b/0lF3mGOtkCpKOdGikkav3qNVfA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvdduvddggeegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepifgrtoht rghnpgftihhvvghtuceoghhrihhvvgesuhdvheeirdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrh hnpefguefhffelleduueehueetueefgedtieevudduhfegveetuedtleeuffeuheekfeen ucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgrhhivh gvsehuvdehiedrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 27A9762C0064; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 07:39:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-403-gbc3c488b23-fm-20210419.005-gbc3c488b Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <86ec65b0-e4c6-46cd-a5f3-77a5d9947da0@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1608304614-13908-2-git-send-email-xuemingl@nvidia.com> <1618283653-16510-1-git-send-email-xuemingl@nvidia.com> <2917281.N2CalQlgY7@thomas> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 13:39:00 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Ga=C3=ABtan_Rivet?= To: "Kinsella, Ray" , "Thomas Monjalon" , "Xueming(Steven) Li" Cc: "Gaetan Rivet" , dev@dpdk.org, "Asaf Penso" , "David Marchand" Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] =?utf-8?q?=5BPATCH_v5_0/5=5D_eal=3A_enable_global_dev?= =?utf-8?q?ice_syntax_by_default?= 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 Sender: "dev" On Fri, Apr 23, 2021, at 13:06, Kinsella, Ray wrote: > > > On 14/04/2021 20:49, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 13/04/2021 05:14, Xueming Li: > >> Xueming Li (5): > >> devargs: unify scratch buffer storage > >> devargs: fix memory leak on parsing error > >> kvargs: add get by key function > >> bus: add device arguments name parsing API > >> devargs: parse global device syntax > > > > The patch 4 adds a new callback in rte_bus. > > I thought about it during the whole day and I don't see any good way > > to merge it without breaking the ABI compatibility. > > > > Only first 3 patches are applied for now, thanks. > > > > I took a look, I don't immediately see the concern. > > The new entry is at the end of the memory structure. > The call back is internal and hidden behind the symbol rte_devargs_layers_parse. > > So will only be trigger by a rte_devargs_layers_parse of the same > version of DPDK that introduce the new callback. > > Should be fine? > It might have been an issue IMO with a structure exposed as an array, i.e. rte_eth_devices[]. But I thought this kind of ABI break was the kind that would be accepted between two LTS. The only potential risk is in using a new version librte_eal.so with an older librte_bus_xxx.so But I think it is fair to expect installations to be internally consistent. Maybe we could have a runtime warning when loading mismatched versions (if there isn't one already) -- each librte_*.so could have an internal version stamp and alignment could be checked through a constructor in each lib? -- Gaetan Rivet