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 7D2AD45B56; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:40:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7C74021F; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:40:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E31240144 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:40:18 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1729111217; 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=hRuZ+CZNza6bAopqOOlwN593n2Rjrjg6y4JWRMj5Nz0=; b=Wz163Vbs8EIFVvWQlGoMZu9L3TSdJGZ83/uVrE18eEMWE/EtCgtWpZLaegBr3/9jQLai3F eCSTrW4v2dHCYnq/ANuc9gsgbF1Qb+11u5eIcMifODS47A2bwD+AnUnHHLxrX5wgHWWmOj prksFIMtXJbj+i1hIqA+c3CNeWmrPI4= Received: from mail-lj1-f200.google.com (mail-lj1-f200.google.com [209.85.208.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-490-FQpzMKA3NhK-TdcsEMcG6g-1; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 16:40:16 -0400 X-MC-Unique: FQpzMKA3NhK-TdcsEMcG6g-1 Received: by mail-lj1-f200.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2fb53ef3524so1751831fa.1 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 13:40:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1729111215; x=1729716015; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=hRuZ+CZNza6bAopqOOlwN593n2Rjrjg6y4JWRMj5Nz0=; b=tf/5+9uRD1l8FEmvNA3t9OWMV/wohy8SCjrIh8NI8l4XVY6pgbcLqHUu/9pQcF2uAc CEoP/6tzFACmslvQmy+1Hke9JGC/Z77Xzr4wsoLgcZou7/fogFWKuG/w+u2IZEnb/UcY 8NaVNM5VjYplgVDuaYu9pu5QEJj9YO9FV9t0hFiK+vT07qSRc3PqfW1OUFB6j4mA/DMt azC6jBu4VMClYnBZRgNaByiMrizZezerEZKDChpFtrItKeWTLWXKwaKZBf52JQA5bfqy I4AgYW4ZgzVm4J+mY157iSXai+yYOGSdiK86BKaw1NZDdpzS/GAd9U7rsbDTwPmN+jiH dj/g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywrdl6gmnGkBhgSvB34H5yk0wprjpP6Rx8+K6RbsZhlKq4V/qXP 4ngIxlB5sGByKUA6dTFg+S2oshdMzzrm6dMczydcqkiFc1Yc1NJzEXUPHd0GiGavUMXUZog2PVD 1XLGZTUTlVMVMofemuwHQ7J+n2Cb8gHR6BX69pAUm/xIDBSdo3RFlW1G6CGtPaei9FqyUQ3tcLE HjGh6uP3DFa+zl39SJkc3sZtAvOg== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9517:0:b0:2fb:3d77:f685 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2fb61bad8e4mr28596541fa.33.1729111215165; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 13:40:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG6Kk+Dx8UpFQtk2Ixq+9O9fu9j2p+O9TLwIdS+sGyy/GgQL+ONuP0qRiW5/7zWAvicbPVqTglcqtI0k301wc4= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9517:0:b0:2fb:3d77:f685 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2fb61bad8e4mr28596491fa.33.1729111214808; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 13:40:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20241015121046.2556695-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20241016113817.3956187-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20241016113817.3956187-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:40:03 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Enhance headers check To: dev@dpdk.org Cc: thomas@monjalon.net, bruce.richardson@intel.com, ktraynor@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 1:38=E2=80=AFPM David Marchand wrote: > > We currently check that exported headers are fine with > -DALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API and -DALLOW_INTERNAL_API. > > Such a check won't catch issues like the one fixed in patch 1, where OVS > compilation is broken by the additional of experimental API in a header > commonly included in other parts of DPDK. > > Ideally, I would like to merge patch 1 in rc1. > The patch 2 is not a real issue (more like the enhanced check would > complain about this header). > In any case, I think it would not hurt merging everything now. Applied patch 1 and 3. I will respin the series (or come up with a different fix for patch 2) for = rc2. --=20 David Marchand