From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9E72200 for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 13:31:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cpe-2606-a000-111b-40fe-f1c6-eb46-ccca-fca5.dyn6.twc.com ([2606:a000:111b:40fe:f1c6:eb46:ccca:fca5] helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1g8OKQ-0002fX-Mp; Fri, 05 Oct 2018 07:31:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 07:30:57 -0400 From: Neil Horman To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: Bruce Richardson , Thomas Monjalon , dev@dpdk.org, Luca Boccassi , Christian Ehrhardt Message-ID: <20181005113057.GA15009@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> References: <20181004154306.65867-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <1785611.eL8Z1dKoq2@xps> <56a42359-9ead-7c33-72a3-1d89d56f383c@intel.com> <33456122.koQSlajCb5@xps> <20181005091351.GA20880@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <475dc69c-ed2f-dcf3-4af0-a7050051c270@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <475dc69c-ed2f-dcf3-4af0-a7050051c270@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-Spam-Status: No Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] config: disable RTE_NEXT_ABI by default 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: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 11:31:41 -0000 On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 11:17:30AM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 10/5/2018 10:13 AM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 05:55:34PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >> 04/10/2018 17:28, Ferruh Yigit: > >>> On 10/4/2018 4:10 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>>> 04/10/2018 17:48, Ferruh Yigit: > >>>>> Enabling RTE_NEXT_ABI means to enable APIs that break the ABI for > >>>>> the current release and these APIs are targeted for further release. > >>>> > >>>> It seems nobody is using it in last releases. > >>>> > >>>>> RTE_NEXT_ABI shouldn't be enabled by default. > >>>> > >>>> The reason for having it enabled by default is that when you build DPDK > >>>> yourself, you probably want the latest features. > >>>> If packaged properly for stability, it is easy to disable it in > >>>> the package recipe. > >>> > >>> My concern was (if this has been used), user may get unstable APIs and without > >>> explicitly being aware of it. > >> > >> I am OK with both defaults (enabled or disabled). > >> > > I'd keep it as is. As said, I'm not sure it's being used right now anyway. > > No, not used right now. > But I think we can use it, did you able to find chance to check: > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2018-October/114372.html > > Option D. > Just to propose something else, We also have the ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API flag that we IIRC default to on. Would it be worth consolidating these two mechanisms into one? Currently ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API lets us flag symbols that are not yet stable, and it seems to work well. It does not however let us simply define out structures/variables that might adversely affect the ABI. Would it be worth considering adding a macro (something like __rte_experimental_symbol()), that allows a variable/struct to be defined if ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API is set, and squashed otherwise? Neil