From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 803DD3777 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:54:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2016 01:54:08 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,393,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="1010371136" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.95]) ([10.237.221.95]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2016 01:54:08 -0700 To: Olivier Matz , dev@dpdk.org References: <1468936875-1652-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> <1468998974-3040-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> Cc: jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, thomas.monjalon@6wind.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <578F3C2E.1050909@intel.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 09:54:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1468998974-3040-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for mbuf structure X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 08:54:09 -0000 On 7/20/2016 8:16 AM, Olivier Matz wrote: > For 16.11, the mbuf structure will be modified implying ABI breakage. > Some discussions already took place here: > http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12878/ > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz > --- > > v1->v2: > - reword the sentences to keep things more open, as suggested by Bruce > > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > index f502f86..b9f5a93 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > @@ -41,3 +41,9 @@ Deprecation Notices > * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and > will be removed in 16.11. > It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions. > + > +* ABI changes are planned for 16.11 in the ``rte_mbuf`` structure: some fields > + may be reordered to facilitate the writing of ``data_off``, ``refcnt``, and > + ``nb_segs`` in one operation, because some platforms have an overhead if the > + store address is not naturally aligned. Other mbuf fields, such as the > + ``port`` field, may be moved or removed as part of this mbuf work. > Not directly related to this patch, but generally for deprecation notices, does it make sense to tag explicitly which library effected, like: * librte_mbuf [perhaps with version here]: Explanation about deprecation ... For this case it is more clear which library effected, but sometimes that is not obvious from deprecation notice. Also when checked for if specific library effected, it is harder to find with current notes. Thanks, ferruh