From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
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>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] config: remove RTE_NEXT_ABI
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:17:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1672091.0Tzq5VA8o7@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cc7522b2-d0b1-6522-527e-3e247c59ba62@intel.com>
08/03/2018 12:43, Ferruh Yigit:
> 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.
Yes I think you are right, it can be disabled by default.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-08 15:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-07 17:44 Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-07 18:06 ` Luca Boccassi
2018-03-08 8:05 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-03-08 11:43 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-08 15:17 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2018-03-08 15:35 ` Neil Horman
2018-03-08 16:04 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-03-08 19:40 ` Neil Horman
2018-03-08 21:34 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-03-09 0:18 ` Neil Horman
2018-10-04 15:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] config: disable RTE_NEXT_ABI by default Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-04 14:49 ` Luca Boccassi
2018-10-04 15:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-04 15:10 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-10-04 15:28 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-04 15:55 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-10-05 9:13 ` Bruce Richardson
2018-10-05 10:17 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-10-05 11:30 ` Neil Horman
2018-10-05 12:35 ` Ferruh Yigit
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=1672091.0Tzq5VA8o7@xps \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=bluca@debian.org \
--cc=christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
--cc=marko.kovacevic@intel.com \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
/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).