From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E39B7A0555; Wed, 25 May 2022 20:02:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892AB40146; Wed, 25 May 2022 20:02:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-108-mta128.mxroute.com (mail-108-mta128.mxroute.com [136.175.108.128]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06D7B40143 for ; Wed, 25 May 2022 20:02:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from filter006.mxroute.com ([140.82.40.27] 140.82.40.27.vultrusercontent.com) (Authenticated sender: mN4UYu2MZsgR) by mail-108-mta128.mxroute.com (ZoneMTA) with ESMTPSA id 180fc62cf56000c327.001 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256); Wed, 25 May 2022 18:02:55 +0000 X-Zone-Loop: 9cfd0a19c02882ca3886d5adad005f36c7926744479c X-Originating-IP: [140.82.40.27] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ashroe.eu; s=x; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:In-reply-to:Subject:Cc:To: From:References:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=yOsY7tv+q9fqi9WiQs6ClvMFBZ/7/by4Q2cUCzExx6E=; b=gy5ky5OdAmQ+KaqNxtE0Ith4Rt gdn8BpDxSGkflKRON04rq73O1RKjUD8+NUP8G66FH9TBxqcO+vXRs19Y5TF7rvg7L+ml1Nhl+YlK0 JWJm+qlFEp/F2ekPyJGS3lLrc+fKTSmXV1dmBZ9qES2xfeW77WLbjK//8ijzAQ4a4V/aHX5eCVB+U N5UobZRm5KQDgE1f77tYo0NRmIllvtDtE0nSeShu6JX8qb0k0YGyr1VxkMbiaPqTAuQrcL50EjNBM NYZPiaoGBFhwY8qFHLBgZcr7pLxtXZlvOrW/lvozumVJ2PMsAGv7/VFgrOXbgN3ug1CJcJYAwA1JW IyBIYB9g==; References: <20220525095307.675312-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <87ee0hzvd6.fsf@mdr78.vserver.site> <4084096.uADA5c2rLh@thomas> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.15; emacs 27.1 From: Ray Kinsella To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com, techboard@dpdk.org, David Christensen Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal/ppc: undefine AltiVec keyword vector In-reply-to: <4084096.uADA5c2rLh@thomas> Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 19:02:52 +0100 Message-ID: <878rqpze0j.fsf@mdr78.vserver.site> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AuthUser: mdr@ashroe.eu X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Thomas Monjalon writes: > 25/05/2022 13:48, Ray Kinsella: >> >> Thomas Monjalon writes: >> >> > The AltiVec header file is defining "vector", except in C++ build. >> > The keyword "vector" may conflict easily. >> > As a rule, it is better to use the alternative keyword "__vector". >> > >> > The DPDK header file rte_altivec.h takes care of undefining "vector", >> > so the applications and dependencies are free to define the name "vector". >> > >> > This is a compatibility breakage for applications which were using >> > the keyword "vector" for its AltiVec meaning. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon >> > --- >> > doc/guides/rel_notes/release_22_07.rst | 5 +++++ >> > lib/eal/ppc/include/rte_altivec.h | 7 +++++++ >> > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+) >> > >> >> Acked-by: Ray Kinsella > > Just to make sure, we are all OK to break compatibility of rte_altivec.h? > It means the keyword vector is not available anymore with this #include. > Please confirm it is OK to merge in DPDK 22.07. I did think about it yes ;-). I can't see how it would break the ABI in the short term. And it makes sense to preclude this keyword in the long term. So I ack'ed - did I miss something? -- Regards, Ray K