From: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "mdr@ashroe.eu" <mdr@ashroe.eu>,
"Zhang, Roy Fan" <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>,
"Singh, Jasvinder" <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pipeline: remove experimental tag from API
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 20:34:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DM8PR11MB567096C5A0B98F889B26B666EBB69@DM8PR11MB5670.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2106314.BK4HBGaCKb@thomas>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2021 11:18 AM
> To: Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mdr@ashroe.eu; Zhang, Roy Fan
> <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>; Singh, Jasvinder <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pipeline: remove experimental tag from API
>
> 01/09/2021 14:20, Jasvinder Singh:
> > These APIs were introduced in 18.05, therefore removing
> > experimental tag to promote them to stable state.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jasvinder Singh <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
> > ---
> > lib/pipeline/rte_port_in_action.h | 10 ----------
> > lib/pipeline/rte_table_action.h | 18 ------------------
> > lib/pipeline/version.map | 16 ++++++----------
> > 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
> Cristian, please can you check whether you intend to keep these functions in
> future?
> If they are candidate to be removed, there is no point to promote them.
>
>
Hi Thomas,
Yes, they are candidate for removal, as the new rte_swx_pipeline API evolves.
But removing them requires updating the drivers/net/softnic code to use the new API, which is not going to be completed in time for release 21.11.
So given this lag, it might be better to simply promote these functions to stable API now, as Ray suggests, instead of continuing to keep them experimental; then, once these functions are no longer used, then we can remove them, most likely in 22.11.
So I will ack these patches, but I am willing to reconsider if you feel strongly against this approach.
Regards,
Cristian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-12 20:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-01 12:20 Jasvinder Singh
2021-09-01 13:48 ` Kinsella, Ray
2021-09-03 12:56 ` Zhang, Roy Fan
2021-09-03 13:00 ` Kinsella, Ray
2021-09-27 10:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-10-12 20:34 ` Dumitrescu, Cristian [this message]
2021-10-12 21:52 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-10-13 8:51 ` Kinsella, Ray
2021-10-13 9:40 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-10-13 9:43 ` Kinsella, Ray
2021-10-13 9:49 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-10-13 10:02 ` Kinsella, Ray
2021-10-13 11:11 ` Bruce Richardson
2021-10-13 11:42 ` Kinsella, Ray
2021-10-13 11:58 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-10-12 20:34 ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2021-10-13 8:51 ` Kinsella, Ray
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=DM8PR11MB567096C5A0B98F889B26B666EBB69@DM8PR11MB5670.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jasvinder.singh@intel.com \
--cc=mdr@ashroe.eu \
--cc=roy.fan.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).