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 6E71EA0A0C; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 15:53:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7A2F4123E; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 15:53:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-108-mta82.mxroute.com (mail-108-mta82.mxroute.com [136.175.108.82]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D09AA4014F for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 15:53:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from filter004.mxroute.com ([149.28.56.236] filter004.mxroute.com) (Authenticated sender: mN4UYu2MZsgR) by mail-108-mta82.mxroute.com (ZoneMTA) with ESMTPSA id 17b1170b2bc00074ba.001 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256); Wed, 04 Aug 2021 13:53:23 +0000 X-Zone-Loop: 347b3f00d1c4786a092cf31eba1de2fa0105e1229962 X-Originating-IP: [149.28.56.236] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ashroe.eu; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=QUhnMvWIUxq0xDA90gwOjQpz5quixn8xhK+k1uZoCDE=; b=q/twqBVeEHrsJHB852SrRapECS BGp9NClo9meF/okzuHupVViJ+YsVQLVbEN3iVULZ7zEZPB+Sj0Lpc8puBbgfG9oDfeRtmSkSOZsLH GQzRmOy3Him9HPtSeNRefLM37Ry5TjRw3zh2T8pOJ05u2zuK+bhsPPLtwnV9MMFhjfTf16mGSMGmr HWnqO9Nl8Gt4y5lW7KsJ4WbZFvzV079M7DkPA1FixV4UoF36H94mWdLI+ggThyI8aTA61zO8VvtbD sVQd1OkSidgZnFc5a3ulEjN8vl6FvH4nmsAv6GWQ5aK6WWcP9T57t0v3fkSDfPmOtJe7rp5BnPyvq YfYdUWkw==; To: Thomas Monjalon , "Xueming(Steven) Li" Cc: dpdk-dev , techboard@dpdk.org References: <20210623000349.631468-2-xuemingl@nvidia.com> <6288309.S2O2uDqRzi@thomas> From: "Kinsella, Ray" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 14:53:20 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6288309.S2O2uDqRzi@thomas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AuthUser: mdr@ashroe.eu X-Zone-Spam-Resolution: no action X-Zone-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1, required=15, tests=[ARC_NA=0, URIBL_BLOCKED=0, FROM_HAS_DN=0, RCPT_COUNT_THREE=0, TO_DN_SOME=0, MIME_GOOD=-0.1, FROM_EQ_ENVFROM=0, MIME_TRACE=0, RCVD_COUNT_ZERO=0, NEURAL_SPAM=0, MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM=0] Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/2] bus/auxiliary: introduce auxiliary bus 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 Sender: "dev" On 04/08/2021 14:12, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 04/08/2021 15:00, Xueming(Steven) Li: >> From: Kinsella, Ray >>> On 04/08/2021 13:11, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: >>>> From: Kinsella, Ray >>>>> Its not strictly a depreciation notice though, you are not breaking anything right. >>>>> Since you are not breaking anything, don't think the notice is required in the 21.11 timeframe. >>>>> >>>>> Now if you where doing it in 21.08, it would be an ABI change and that would be a different story. >>>> >>>> Thanks for looking at this! >>>> Yes, it targets to 21.11. The offloading flag is fine, but the shared_group does break ABI, detail: >>>> https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-July/215575.html >>> >>> Right ... its a new field, not a depreciation as such. >>> What I mean by this is that no existing code is broken. >>> >>> 21.11 is a new ABI in any case and you are not depreciating anything, so no notice is required. >> >> Maybe it a new process, confirmed with Thomas, it's expected: >> https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/contributing/abi_policy.html#abi-changes > > I think what Ray means is that it breaks ABI but not API, > so he doesn't consider a notice is required. > My understanding of the policy is that *any* ABI change requires a notice. > But if you want to make it lighter and allow any non-announced ABI change > in an ABI-breaking release, I think I would vote for. Thanks for clarifying Thomas ... you are correct. > > Cc techboard@dpdk.org >