Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] cryptodev: version cryptodev info get function

[Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>]

Hi Ray,

Previously, I only ran the script for the 2 patches.

./devtools/validate-abi.sh <commit id previous to these two patches> HEAD

However when I run for v20.02 and HEAD, the list is quite big. I believe most of them are either experimental or internal PMD. But cryptodev is still there.

NOTICE: abi-compliance-checker returned 1
NOTICE: ABI may be incompatible, check reports/logs for details.
NOTICE: Incompatible list:  librte_bbdev.so librte_common_iavf.so librte_common_octeontx2.so librte_cryptodev.so librte_eal.so librte_efd.so librte_eventdev.so librte_hash.so librte_ipsec.so librte_meter.so librte_pdump.so librte_pmd_crypto_scheduler.so librte_pmd_dpaa2_sec.so librte_pmd_dpaa_sec.so librte_pmd_ring.so librte_ring.so librte_vhost.so

Regards,
Akhil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:18 PM
> To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; Arek Kusztal
> <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: fiona.trahe@intel.com; ray.kinsella@intel.com; bruce.richardson@intel.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] cryptodev: version cryptodev info get
> function
> 
> Hi Akhil,
> 
> So 1st thing is that this that validate-abi uses "ABI Compliance Checker",
> which does not use libabigail.ignore.
> 
> So you will end up with different results compared to using libabigail as follows:
> 
> DPDK_ABI_REF_DIR=<some absolute path>
> DPDK_ABI_REF_VERSION=v20.02 ./devtools/test-meson-builds.sh
> 
> I did check with the "ABI Compliance Checker" (I like this tool also), however I
> got the following
> 
> NOTICE: No error detected, ABI is compatible.
> INFO: Logs are in /root/src/dpdk/abi-check/abi-check.log
> INFO: HTML reports are in /root/src/dpdk/abi-check/compat_reports directory
> 
> What references did you use with validate-abi.sh (I used v20.02 and HEAD).
> 
> Ray K
> 
> On 09/05/2020 22:11, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> > Hi Ray/Arek,
> >
> > I still see Incompatible cryptodev even after update in the abignore list.
> > I checked it with ./devtools/validate-abi.sh
> > NOTICE: ABI may be incompatible, check reports/logs for details.
> > NOTICE: Incompatible list:  librte_cryptodev.so
> >
> > Did I miss something?
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On 07/05/2020 11:57, Arek Kusztal wrote:
> >>> This patch adds versioned function rte_cryptodev_info_get()
> >>> to prevent some issues with ABI policy.
> >>> Node v21 works in same way as before, returning driver capabilities
> >>> directly to the API caller. These capabilities may include new elements
> >>> not part of the v20 ABI.
> >>> Node v20 function maintains compatibility with v20 ABI releases
> >>> by stripping out elements not supported in v20 ABI. Because
> >>> rte_cryptodev_info_get is called by other API functions,
> >>> rte_cryptodev_sym_capability_get function is versioned the same way.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Arek Kusztal <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> v2:
> >>> - changed version numbers of symbols to 20.0.2
> >>> v3:
> >>> - added v2/v3 informations
> >>> - changed version numbers of symbols to 21
> >>> v4:
> >>> - fixed clang build by movind binding default symbol
> >>> - implemented mailing list comments
> >>> - added abidiff tool suppression entries
> >>> v5:
> >>> - fixed meson build
> >>>
> >>>  devtools/libabigail.abignore                   |   8 ++
> >>>  lib/librte_cryptodev/meson.build               |   1 +
> >>>  lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c           | 147
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>>  lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h           |  34 +++++-
> >>>  lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev_version.map |   7 ++
> >>>  5 files changed, 191 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >> [SNIP]
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>