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 DF38AA0524; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:15:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 333FF1C033; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:15:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CCD81C032 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:15:45 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1580400945; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=jzfqXgC470hJ+jIsOv5F3oI12eoUf/DuTksKD0yPByA=; b=fHRd5KMyeRYBjarx0RmEQIxZa4y6QHdhpkW8Jfs24/EmXdOnw3la+RlVPWXshcV3mh8UKi mGrqkLJNuLwTUcMzwrpCFxq7HQevTN2ooaHN1QYyEic3b9wOfMvM1EEG4vltG5DdieSzi5 Hf6ekhtAWNMZS27wYff9G1ThEQiU5Ik= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-373-tvJAUNNhMqOpKdWlRJSfTg-1; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 11:15:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCA161800D41; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 16:15:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.116.53] (ovpn-116-53.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.53]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38A8E5DA7B; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 16:15:37 +0000 (UTC) From: "Eelco Chaudron" To: "Luca Boccassi" Cc: "Thomas Monjalon" , "Ferruh Yigit" , "Neil Horman" , "Cristian Dumitrescu" , dev@dpdk.org, "David Marchand" , "Bruce Richardson" , "Ian Stokes" , "Andrzej Ostruszka" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:15:35 +0100 Message-ID: <7465A5AB-87B6-465F-B794-799D562566BE@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <3a08271e0d811359f7dc1cc732b6bdc89cc98a4e.camel@debian.org> References: <20200129122953.2016199-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <1929128.8hb0ThOEGa@xps> <71b93a9bbebf1f047f24d3f455eab1bf2712dcf4.camel@debian.org> <5634584.alqRGMn8q6@xps> <3a08271e0d811359f7dc1cc732b6bdc89cc98a4e.camel@debian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-MC-Unique: tvJAUNNhMqOpKdWlRJSfTg-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] meter: fix ABI break due to experimental tag removal 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" On 30 Jan 2020, at 17:04, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Thu, 2020-01-30 at 16:55 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >> 30/01/2020 15:21, Luca Boccassi: >>> On Thu, 2020-01-30 at 15:17 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>> 30/01/2020 13:57, Luca Boccassi: >>>>> On Thu, 2020-01-30 at 13:33 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I disagree with the need of this patch. >>>>>> The symbol was experimental, meaning we can change it. >>>>>> Removing experimental tag is not an ABI break. >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> This symbol change was requested for backport in 19.11.x, and >>>>> experimental or not I'm not too keen on backward incompatible >>>>> changes >>>>> to the public interface in an _LTS point release_. The >>>>> compromise >>>>> was >>>>> to see if we could support both symbols version, which makes >>>>> the >>>>> change >>>>> backward compatible. >>>>> >>>>> If you prefer not to have this patch in mainline I'm also fine >>>>> in >>>>> taking it just for the LTS. I agree with you that it is not >>>>> required >>>>> for mainline releases (although nicer for me if it's a backport >>>>> rather >>>>> than a new change). >>>> >>>> I would like to avoid opening the door for maintaining the >>>> experimental ABI >>>> in the mainline. Please take it directly in the LTS. >>>> >>>> The next question is to know whether we really want to have such >>>> patch in LTS. >>>> Anyway, 19.11.0 has this symbol as experimental. >>>> How adding a non-experimental version of the function in 19.11.1 >>>> will >>>> change >>>> the ABI status of the whole 19.11 branch? >>> >>> The problem is not adding the new symbol, but removing the >>> experimental >>> one. Changing the version of the symbol was requested by OVS for >>> inclusion in 19.11. >> >> Yes, sorry, this is what I meant. >> Given 19.11.0 already has the symbol as experimental, >> and that applications like OVS had to accept it as experimental, >> why removing experimental tag in 19.11.1? > > I think it was mentioned that it was preferred not to suppress the > compiler warning to avoid any accidental use in the future, but the=20 > OVS > maintainer(s) should answer as I might remember wrongly. Yes this is the reason, OVS compiles with -Werror so we would like to=20 avoid the warnings. You can not disable them per include, it=E2=80=99s glob= al=20 for all of DPDK. //Eelco