DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Liu, Jijiang" <jijiang.liu@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for struct rte_eth_conf
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 07:47:56 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC22BE51F5@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3679869.2UDrnTTX50@xps13>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 11:40 AM
> To: Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for struct
> rte_eth_conf
> 
> 2015-12-07 03:30, Liu, Jijiang:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 11:17 AM
> > > To: Liu, Jijiang
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change for struct
> > > rte_eth_conf
> > >
> > > 2015-12-07 11:01, Jijiang Liu:
> > > > +* ABI changes are planned for struct rte_eth_conf in order to
> > > > +support
> > > > +  tunneling packet configuration in unified tunneling API. The
> > > > +release 2.2
> > > does not contain these ABI
> > > > +  changes, but release 2.3 will, and no backwards compatibility is
> planned.
> > >
> > > Please, more details would be appreciated.
> > > We need to decide whether an ABI deprecation is the right choice.
> >
> > * ABI changes are planned for struct rte_eth_conf in order to support
> >   tunneling packet configuration in unified tunneling APIs, which is the
> rte_eth_dev_tunnel_configure
> >   (uint8_t port_id, uint16_t rx_q, uint16_t tx_q, rte_eth_tunnel_conf *
> tunnel_conf) API is planned to add.
> >   and the 'tunnel_conf' shloud be stored in global 'rte_eth_conf'.
> >   The release 2.2 does not contain these ABI change, but release 2.3 will,
> and no backwards compatibility is planned.
> >
> > Is it enough clear?
> 
> No, I think we need an explanation in the commit message of what is the
> purpose of rte_eth_dev_tunnel_configure() and tunnel_conf.
Ok, will do.
> Ideally, an RFC patch would help.
I'm working  on RFC patch, but it probably will miss merge timeslot of this release.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-07  7:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-07  3:01 Jijiang Liu
2015-12-07  3:16 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-07  3:30   ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-12-07  3:40     ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-07  7:47       ` Liu, Jijiang [this message]
2015-12-07 11:43         ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-07 10:42 ` Chilikin, Andrey

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=1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC22BE51F5@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=jijiang.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.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).