From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>
Received: from stargate3.asicdesigners.com (stargate.chelsio.com [12.32.117.8])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3381111F5
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 14:51:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (scalar.blr.asicdesigners.com [10.193.185.94])
 by stargate3.asicdesigners.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tBFDphUe003361;
 Tue, 15 Dec 2015 05:51:44 -0800
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 19:21:38 +0530
From: Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <20151215135136.GA27814@scalar.blr.asicdesigners.com>
References: <cover.1449747042.git.rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>
 <ee428162dcca6b7d8200d330f7cf8756b911b8d5.1449747042.git.rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>
 <20151215084048.GA26906@scalar.blr.asicdesigners.com>
 <2837192.XpzTdfrod8@xps13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2837192.XpzTdfrod8@xps13>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Felix Marti <felix@chelsio.com>,
 Nirranjan Kirubaharan <nirranjan@chelsio.com>, Kumar A S <kumaras@chelsio.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 3/3] doc: announce ABI change for filtering
 support
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: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:51:48 -0000

Hi Thomas,

On Tuesday, December 12/15/15, 2015 at 00:55:20 -0800, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-12-15 14:10, Rahul Lakkireddy:
> > Hi Thomas,
> > 
> > I am preparing a v2 of this series where I will be accomodating some
> > more fields to be considered for filtering. However, if the overall
> > approach seems ok to everyone then, should I submit a separate patch
> > for this ABI change announcement ?
> 
> Yes, if this announce is not enough:
> 	http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=648e6b3815a35
> 

Apart from rte_eth_fdir_flow ABI change mentioned in above link, new
fields will be added to rte_eth_ipv4_flow and rte_eth_ipv6_flow,
which break their ABI.

Also, 4 new flow types will be added, which increases RTE_ETH_FLOW_MAX
from 18 to 22 and breaks the ABI.

Should I send a separate ABI change announce patch for each of them?

Thanks,
Rahul