From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12081B6A6 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:32:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Oct 2017 03:32:57 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.43,431,1503385200"; d="scan'208";a="166849257" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.32]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 25 Oct 2017 03:32:55 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 25 Oct 2017 11:32:54 +0100 Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 11:32:54 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: santosh , dev@dpdk.org, "olivier.matz@6wind.com" , "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: <20171025103254.GA12048@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20170905103119.20511-1-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> <1726043.3urDsTveGQ@xps> <20171025100545.GA11132@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> <2132580.mYdmqLBblI@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2132580.mYdmqLBblI@xps> Organization: Intel Research and Development Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 5/6] doc: remove dpdk iova aware notice X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 10:32:59 -0000 On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:12:57PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 25/10/2017 12:05, Bruce Richardson: > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:01:26PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 25/10/2017 11:50, Richardson, Bruce: > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > On Tuesday 24 October 2017 01:59 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > > > > 20/10/2017 14:31, Santosh Shukla: > > > > > > >> Removed dpdk iova aware ABI deprecation notice, and updated ABI > > > > > > >> change details in release_17.11.rst. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla > > > > > > >> Acked-by: John McNamara > > > > > > >> --- > > > > > > >> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > > > > > > >> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > > > > > > >> -* eal: An ABI change is planned for 17.11 to make DPDK aware of > > > > > > >> IOVA address > > > > > > >> - translation scheme. > > > > > > >> - Reference to phys address in EAL data-structure or functions may > > > > > > >> change to > > > > > > >> - IOVA address or more appropriate name. > > > > > > >> - The change will be only for the name. > > > > > > >> - Functional aspects of the API or data-structure will remain same. > > > > > > > Sorry, this series cannot be applied as is because it is breaking > > > > > > > more than EAL API. The API of mbuf and mempool are also changed. > > > > > > > We need to choose one of these three options: > > > > > > > 1/ accept to break all API in 17.11 > > > > > > > 2/ postpone the whole series to 18.02 > > > > > > > > > > > > Theme of series is to make dpdk iova aware so I would prefer option 1) > > > > > or 2). > > > > > > However I have no strong opinion on this topic. > > > > > > Lets get more opinion from others about option 1/2/3. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3/ rename only EAL API in 17.11 and postpone mbuf/mempool > > > > > > > > > > After discussing with Olivier it appeared there is a fourth solution. > > > > > We should not break any API (EAL, mbuf, mempool). > > > > > > > > > > I would like to merge these changes in RC2, but keeping compatibility with > > > > > old names: > > > > > - When you rename a function or a type, you can define a macro for the old > > > > > name, alias the new name. > > > > > > > > Note: using a macro doesn't prevent the ABI being broken if you rename a public function. You'll need to use function versioning too. > > > > > > True > > > We can use an inline function to avoid ABI breakage. > > > > Nope, inline function won't work either, since that ends up the same as > > the macro and compiled into the end app, not the library ABI. You > > need a public non-inline wrapper function to keep ABI, or else function > > renaming via symbol versioning/mapping. > > Ah ah ah, I'm writing before thinking :) > Yes, the function must not be inlined. > > And generally speaking it is not an issue, > even for performance critical functions. > Adding one more function call in the path is not a bad thing > for deprecated functions. > I've seen another project (don't remember which one) adding a > sleep() in deprecated functions and increasing the sleep time > at each new release :) Genius!!