From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f65.google.com (mail-it0-f65.google.com [209.85.214.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A70C100C for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 14:00:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-it0-f65.google.com with SMTP id 186-v6so14690118itu.0 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:00:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CAjoGYPSEBdsgIoWZJwHpzaVpsqxY7quw2gf7nsvoiU=; b=Cu5nhygHZPeECr0opz3k32lE1pol5fK3f0qweyWEXGi6aZ/4SuNniH/BOkXubLYxQL ALFg/ATak/Oh16KcH3E5NxmpeE7PCVGzEE8T94m+nW0S5i3pQ6LTLYMoxfOKDDTpCRWI AyHglRWZgIgH8FWQld5kNc+e3A8gcmxaIb9VZ7jUZuvKBeets1JgH2LQQSFq3nDnlbed 8GAXblre/YZO49GUIRiIflQLOXFEirnek0ZKmppvpZ+L/6oo6p0fmRUKA5C5MuiP9dvB 0WZhKOPRkxb/bAf7notWw/yN/pmbAmhLDyU4O9vhm9UwgtUmTj/dXhe/EsmiF1I7m7N1 dVqQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CAjoGYPSEBdsgIoWZJwHpzaVpsqxY7quw2gf7nsvoiU=; b=dwSSIWJe0pQif5i+q+hP76KItUCaszihQjleWVER4WqxeWAg7NX5FpTnp2tlQ9WvZC i/pCS2oKVBMLUFfEYqVEsBysW/DY3cuKE0mt2ZnBEuWPuf7nPYAKRTP+C4J80O/eq2u+ 5kg0fGUfhdD/yOQi6cjTXl0ns42kdmogbzv5f4qwLo5/mbQ+uISbUv9tIEkzM9W197mO DNJvGth24U9mAmo4R6zCP51hcEYiupGT5TCaZ28pvNf1BXKjwllZKV49+Cduae0W/uIJ Xmoxpw94nlibrUG0ZzQmsI1yVWj4STHs5GSopixDQzyBr/vhqYWUp7d42oFhV1b5x/X5 lbvA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tD2uoPAuWRqS3DmsAaeVu1KyIj15TPBfd7joqJiQrF9ecXQGwbX hDZ+SFgogfM01fIgLx7t9EUdCFpapdDZFkd9eP2IgXFZ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/iQjm1nSzJJdIIdGDf0mrpJabxhfR9qwxovH7WyH8yuxtPpbCJF4XtdYSSnlwe6uxQD1EZlC2rHCEhP6o25zI= X-Received: by 2002:a24:594e:: with SMTP id p75-v6mr19132035itb.135.1524571212206; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:00:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a02:9008:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 04:59:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180424021511.17430-1-thomas@monjalon.net> References: <20180424021511.17430-1-thomas@monjalon.net> From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 13:59:51 +0200 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: remove experimental flag of ports enumeration 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:00:13 -0000 On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > The basic operations for ports enumeration should not be > considered as experimental in DPDK 18.05. > > The iterator RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV was introduced in DPDK 17.05. > It uses the function the rte_eth_find_next_owned_by() to get > only ownerless ports. Its API can be considered stable. > So the flag experimental is removed from rte_eth_find_next_owned_by(). > > The flag experimental is removed from rte_eth_dev_count_avail() > which is the new name of the old function rte_eth_dev_count(). > > The flag experimental is set to rte_eth_dev_count_total() > in the .c file for consistency with the declaration in the .h file. > > A lot of internal applications are fixed to not allow experimental API. > > Fixes: 8728ccf37615 ("fix ethdev ports enumeration") > Fixes: d9a42a69febf ("ethdev: deprecate port count function") > Fixes: e70e26861eaf ("net/mvpp2: fix build") > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon Tested-by: David Marchand > It was a really bad idea to keep the iterator macro and function > as experimental. > And it was a real mistake of setting the new name of rte_eth_dev_count > function as experimental. > > I think this fix must be merged in 18.05-rc1, in order to avoid > troubles when testing coming RC1. +1 -- David Marchand