From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC4DDA04E0; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 13:13:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2EF91E2B; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 13:13:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-2.mimecast.com [205.139.110.61]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D747235 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 13:13:16 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1575029595; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xdqFCpe/YrySFHkxXzgFyxe5cQbzO1MxG9ajXEaXC/Y=; b=GejbO69CVfmoxKHZTyNLTLzYJNF7HgGsIzQw/sNFaOhQWdYOeFBqwn6Af8DPI6hZRknolz QJIsRAGMa2fHrdl4vMIvQMIX3u/8pXTbCEJrU7+DMGu8sfztQJuwzcmPvYwDFAQDpQU+Qx jb+aVhVyOotBKa+PSUDZI1ufzxTLZOQ= Received: from mail-vk1-f198.google.com (mail-vk1-f198.google.com [209.85.221.198]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-60-OrXoifRpMo-8rzDmLQSdvA-1; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 07:13:14 -0500 Received: by mail-vk1-f198.google.com with SMTP id l4so13518363vkn.6 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 04:13:14 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xdqFCpe/YrySFHkxXzgFyxe5cQbzO1MxG9ajXEaXC/Y=; b=Ob9id8Chkp99fz7ZwWESCIWM3iXO3a9jskiqo+FNjmJ1eLzpif8dBJZr1i9Ikg+tK/ RukF2TdDFeLT1HM3ZODPihYqOwtE/zPf9GdPyrqfqvGVKfzNPufsHBIU5A9dBFcMRNRs gAcGasr6JOu0kLEJvrOEhvpBVWfNeTvavHM2Du5F27jsTRF+eB2JgqUERM0Gqy+oxHoO yo49DU0ksVoB4WDc0pnYOYwGzCX8R5uJBWfp9sk5/+P3D5EobXAp8Si0c3YWapfv0a63 05EEk/pAjORqCe2YsVQwadNUOXsAm9OgZd1KBe4Go3hAhX4/HzEhNset6LPhlpicNlap g/8A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXfpjL17Sasp2w7Wzb6maUahJcRoYT9ww+eBgtIHiyNld+wNX/D hXvFJTCGs7FWbmGaj5ugBDz3BSAgw6yLiqvagqlvanCoR8VitSFQVKuFlQ23dVbCmBEGpWi11TA c2Kl6Wy9+cFjzVMTj8qk= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b303:: with SMTP id a3mr3177012vsm.141.1575029594070; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 04:13:14 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxcxohP89fCdT3RkwWfKU+j+76pk8DT0LxWTIIVCCkvQDP8aJoRsw+IQKoSG+xEf4wfd446CbIdu6fwwQ14utI= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b303:: with SMTP id a3mr3176987vsm.141.1575029593657; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 04:13:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191023010754.65172-1-kevin.laatz@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20191023010754.65172-1-kevin.laatz@intel.com> From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 13:13:02 +0100 Message-ID: To: Kevin Laatz Cc: dev , Bruce Richardson , Thomas Monjalon , "Kinsella, Ray" X-MC-Unique: OrXoifRpMo-8rzDmLQSdvA-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/6] Add ABI compatibility checks to the meson build X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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" Hello Kevin, On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:26 AM Kevin Laatz wrote: > > With the recent changes made to stabilize ABI versioning in DPDK, it will > become increasingly important to check patches for ABI compatibility. We > propose adding the ABI compatibility checking to be done as part of the > build. > > The advantages to adding the ABI compatibility checking to the build are > two-fold. Firstly, developers can easily check their patches to make sure > they don=E2=80=99t break the ABI without adding any extra steps. Secondly= , it > makes the integration into existing CI seamless since there are no extra > scripts to make the CI run. The build will run as usual and if an > incompatibility is detected in the ABI, the build will fail and show the > incompatibility. As an added bonus, enabling the ABI compatibility checks > does not impact the build speed. > > The proposed solution works as follows: > 1. Generate the ABI dump of the baseline. This can be done with the new > script added in this RFC. This step will only need to be done when the > ABI version changes (so once a year) and can be added to master so it > exists by default. This step can be skipped if the dump files for the > baseline already exist. > 2. Build with meson. If there is an ABI incompatibility, the build will > fail and print the incompatibility information. > > The patches accompanying this RFC add the ABI dump file generating script= , > the meson option required to enable/disable the checks, and the required > meson changes to run the compatibility checks during the build. Could you rebase this series on master? Thanks. --=20 David Marchand