From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E115AA00BE; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 21:55:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946B31D62F; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 21:55:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2192B1D62C for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 21:55:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56193815; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:55:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:55:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= OXWBxHII0XzqmtqOdiepamhs1z67sd559qjWOXzisNw=; b=IfUpwoy+Jyg/9LHv Ib81fR9gy/rhO7cLsMDu8SA7v5gFba7JtLNdNvLFZ8lgldZ5UfoFEARwzXz9zgVV lgfEy0J/yGIAFsT5mKJQTmOPzUbceioVmDPtbeln/piuWvtUiGSKKbZRdoTsxUiT sc4PEmPIOWVcWBPl+YomBX1Y8NgX0mU2/vz7ldGlUCl08G0d28qksp69ksQZPHat H7e2fcVurEgQyJ8Zbts12jfbjmOq7SeguV2EYm56FsJmjOPYwvOiNw3zKvVonB6K JlhGnRsgvrTCWpOomMhgq4Twg9obOTR7mLgMg/anJIyS6OAceibBO8GCtWIlmKtf sK/JtQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=OXWBxHII0XzqmtqOdiepamhs1z67sd559qjWOXzis Nw=; b=ivodq59M/hUX2I5rSo4KynUm06RUfhBsokuyofW2TPL0nRsQ9ZTw1sEEL zPFjW83BfswgVAadMJzTN5n0lhVfNYyhLwg5Bx+1mU3HlahceDSqbzcPTAuTvIC8 WzEPS2j1s4PYaCwmde59+WzuaGiVZpG45TvUKP6IcSbE+jS+i+IuQ1d1CKzYT47g SGmGGaau9hp5GIZl2ZC6tMtWJTLc9KLbmAl/epF6x5vEaC8fy8nLWONBO94iWdYn Zf8pPqP8jUq6G/Aa5MNqnab5utTBkhOr64A054GwrG5yx4T8j9eIEvaj45IT717P mEvXTnudkHoKW22Is7CiMCJ0cDfMQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedriedugddugeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpeguphgukhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecu vehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrg hssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7BFE5328005D; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:55:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Ray Kinsella , "Laatz, Kevin" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Van Haaren, Harry" , "Kinsella, Ray" , "nhorman@tuxdriver.com" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 21:55:22 +0200 Message-ID: <2513934.FGBNh6B6GM@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20200416110040.42819-1-kevin.laatz@intel.com> <0c78eb80-8a82-9892-b388-e72f9afe7cb6@ashroe.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] eal/cpuflags: add x86 based cpu flags 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 28/04/2020 20:11, Laatz, Kevin: > > > --- a/devtools/libabigail.abignore > > > +++ b/devtools/libabigail.abignore > > > > Kevin - you still have the surpession. > > I am testing locally with 1.7.1, and it doesn't complain when I disable the > > supression. > > Are you seeing something different? > > > > Ray, > I have re-tested and with libabigail 1.6 and it reports the addition of the flags as an ABI break without the abignore suppression. > With the suppression, it will still report changes to existing flags (e.g. inserting a new flag somewhere in the middle) in the enum as an ABI break, as expected. > > The Travis CI is also based on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS, which uses libabigail 1.2-1. Without the suppression the community Travis CI builds fail on this false positive. I think Travis uses libabigail 1.6: http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/.ci/linux-build.sh#n61