From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1848CB347 for ; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:39:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Sep 2014 02:45:42 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,554,1406617200"; d="scan'208";a="605305315" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO bricha3-mobl.ir.intel.com) ([10.243.20.20]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 19 Sep 2014 02:45:38 -0700 Received: by bricha3-mobl.ir.intel.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 19 Sep 2014 10:45:38 +0001 Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 10:45:38 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Neil Horman Message-ID: <20140919094537.GA7568@BRICHA3-MOBL> References: <1410809031-19114-1-git-send-email-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> <1410809031-19114-3-git-send-email-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1410809031-19114-3-git-send-email-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/4] Provide initial versioning for all DPDK libraries X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 09:39:54 -0000 On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 03:23:49PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > Add linker version script files to each DPDK library to put a stake in the > ground from which we can start cleaning up API's > > Signed-off-by: Neil Horman > CC: Thomas Monjalon > CC: "Richardson, Bruce" > --- > <... snip for brevity ...> > > diff --git a/lib/librte_acl/Makefile b/lib/librte_acl/Makefile > index 65e566d..1f96645 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_acl/Makefile > +++ b/lib/librte_acl/Makefile > @@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ LIB = librte_acl.a > CFLAGS += -O3 > CFLAGS += $(WERROR_FLAGS) -I$(SRCDIR) > > +EXPORT_MAP := $(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl_version.map > + > # all source are stored in SRCS-y > SRCS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_ACL) += tb_mem.c > > diff --git a/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl_version.map b/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl_version.map > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..4480690 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl_version.map > @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ > +DPDK_1.8 { > + global: > + rte_acl_create; > + rte_acl_find_existing; > + rte_acl_free; > + rte_acl_add_rules; > + rte_acl_reset_rules; > + rte_acl_build; > + rte_acl_reset; > + rte_acl_classify; > + rte_acl_dump; > + rte_acl_list_dump; > + rte_acl_ipv4vlan_add_rules; > + rte_acl_ipv4vlan_build; > + rte_acl_classify_scalar; > + > + local: *; > +}; > + Looking at this versionning, it strikes me that this looks like the perfect opportunity to go to a 2.0 version number. My reasoning: * We have already got fairly significant ABI and indeed API changes in this release due to the mbuf rework. That allow makes it a logical point to bump the Intel DPDK major version number to 2.0 * Having the API versioning start at a 2.0 looks neater than having it at 1.8, since .0 is a nice round version number to start with. Also if we decide in the near future for whatever reasons to go to a 2.0 release, the ABIs are probably still going to be 1.8. [Again, if we ever want to go to 2.0, now looks the perfect time] * For the naming of the .so files, starting with them at a .2 now seems reasonable to me, denoting a clean break with the older releases which did have a different ABI. [Though again it makes more sense if you consider that we may want to move to a 2.0 in future]. What do people think? /Bruce