From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01704CC0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  8 Mar 2018 12:44:02 +0100 (CET)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38])
 by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 08 Mar 2018 03:44:00 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,440,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="180969860"
Received: from fyigit-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.62])
 ([10.237.221.62])
 by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Mar 2018 03:43:59 -0800
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
 John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
 Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>,
 Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
References: <20180307174422.118291-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
 <6880912.l9NoFy8GUE@xps>
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Message-ID: <cc7522b2-d0b1-6522-527e-3e247c59ba62@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 11:43:58 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6880912.l9NoFy8GUE@xps>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] config: remove RTE_NEXT_ABI
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 11:44:04 -0000

On 3/8/2018 8:05 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 07/03/2018 18:44, Ferruh Yigit:
>> After experimental API process defined do we still need RTE_NEXT_ABI
>> config and process which has similar targets?
> 
> They are different targets.
> Experimental API is always enabled but may be avoided by applications.
> Next ABI can be used to break ABI without notice and disabled to keep
> old ABI compatibility. It is almost never used because it is preferred
> to keep ABI compatibility with rte_compat macros, or wait a deprecation
> period after notice.

OK, I see.

Shouldn't we disable it by default at least? Otherwise who is not paying
attention to this config option will get and ABI/API break.