Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: rename rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf

["Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>]

Thanks for the clarification.

Jingjing

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 10:51 PM
> To: Wu, Jingjing
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; nhorman@tuxdriver.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: rename
> rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf
> 
> 2015-06-26 07:03, Wu, Jingjing:
> > Hi, Neil
> >
> > About this patch I have an ABI concern about it.
> > This patch just renamed a struct rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf to
> > rte_eth_mirror_conf, the size and its elements don't change.
> > As my understanding, it will not break the ABI. And I also tested it.
> > But when I use the script ./scripts/validate-abi.sh to check.
> > A low severity problem is reported in symbol "rte_eth_mirror_rule_set"
> >  - Change: "Base type of 2nd parameter mirror_conf has been changed
> > from struct rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf to struct rte_eth_mirror_conf."
> >  - Effect: "Replacement of parameter base type may indicate a change
> > in its semantic meaning."
> >
> > So, I'm not sure whether this patch meet the ABI policy?
> 
> I think it's OK.
> 
> > Additional, about the validate-abi.sh, does it mean we need to fix all
> > the problems it reports? Or we can decide case by case.
> > Can a Low Severity problem be acceptable?
> 
> We have to decide case by case.
> It makes ABI checking impossible to automate.
> That's why any help is welcome to check the git HEAD for ABI violation.