From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B468D99
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  1 Oct 2015 13:00:59 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hmsreliant.think-freely.org
 ([2001:470:8:a08:7aac:c0ff:fec2:933b] helo=localhost)
 by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63)
 (envelope-from <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>)
 id 1Zhbbb-0008Jv-2g; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:00:56 -0400
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:00:49 -0400
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Jasvinder Singh <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20151001110049.GB4537@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
References: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D89126478DBD44@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <1443690315-28489-1-git-send-email-jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1443690315-28489-1-git-send-email-jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
X-Spam-Status: No
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ip_pipeline: add more functions to
 routing-pipeline
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://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: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:00:59 -0000

>  
>  /*
> @@ -106,9 +164,7 @@ struct pipeline_routing_route_add_msg_req {
>  	struct pipeline_routing_route_key key;
>  
>  	/* data */
> -	uint32_t flags;
> -	uint32_t port_id; /* Output port ID */
> -	uint32_t ip; /* Next hop IP address (only valid for remote routes) */
> +	struct pipeline_routing_route_data data;
>  };
>  

The example that you modifying appears to directly set the structure fields that
you removing above.  As such these appear to be ABI breaking changes and need to
go through the ABI process

Neil