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 C4691A052A; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:06:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ECCE1DB1B; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:06:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-2.mimecast.com [207.211.31.81]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3512A1D971 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:06:45 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594393604; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=07O9aDkibcwGVd4f0HRNSJ9E8FAXsFSNn01UnZWu2Tk=; b=cgSxS/toMN4c29m5ellzjTbjOAdY4GsC0exeuR3NpqTj5TA7p9lU8F9EaH0IbVZcnkngn6 9+lxpIlsXVhj8yMTwfNIEdWwO+ln+BZ+9V3rOBOjtb8PHTZ9Y8v/OlW99vWPnohnwLm6l+ OtU1T/aIAgWGPy64quXezkWJSrVDxkQ= Received: from mail-vk1-f200.google.com (mail-vk1-f200.google.com [209.85.221.200]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-215-MYFP7isBO9-MloKiqS8Gww-1; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 11:06:23 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MYFP7isBO9-MloKiqS8Gww-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id n133so1220770vkc.14 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:06:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=07O9aDkibcwGVd4f0HRNSJ9E8FAXsFSNn01UnZWu2Tk=; b=Zbv8gJ2JK2Prr7lp1iyOVJpttOWWrvTvyxGl6IkybUdPOSxkCcVB4LudWIhquiA1OM GZlddRzz9VaRM7tYhZiNvlqkQRQcm4AauFtrrVddK6/XLVvs6XOl4qP1Uj1jwH0Z/tcD z0l8sDdOwgIBOwJCWnjouvrtE5lD8gcjCUKM2fgxR6TtZwQWm2iTIy3qlKFDqWdgAOHq gLxOmJ6+dy+K1eQglHdh858W5QNC5GOvLniEFNPW3WZxzOpDayHKhv69tL0QxXDu2bjK fkNntyb8UY2wbbuFTkmrA6Q2l14oX+gcQnry0c6LvdO46KfcKZGr6nOexkHcICVUOjmb jB+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532QU0aSObyVBPFmvOImvQhQ2urTDvKCzauKpVpUuh/vdBRH+1/N RTWypuCyie3pIooMGfUnB/H1N+G47tBI20ssb6/0ptpch5um3P/JrBFbcYS5HS1i7O+eqGthy4F RTCmultYdm5ZADiei04U= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:2c3:: with SMTP id 61mr49107326uah.87.1594393582709; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:06:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwAmZp5kaIRNuvoX90aNr5mRuH2mqAaxw0vonk8mcU0InEFQ+nKMk1pxvQmHBCZmRaIsdUunleRkaemUAIpG58= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:2c3:: with SMTP id 61mr49107282uah.87.1594393582374; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:06:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200613000055.7909-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> In-Reply-To: <20200613000055.7909-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:06:11 +0200 Message-ID: To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev , techboard@dpdk.org, Luca Boccassi , "Mcnamara, John" X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 00/10] rename blacklist/whitelist to block/allow 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 Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 2:01 AM Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > The terms blacklist and whitelist are often seen as reminders > of the divisions in society. Instead, use more exact terms for > handling of which devices are used in DPDK. > > This is a proposed change for DPDK 20.08 to replace the names > blacklist and whitelist in API and command lines. > > The first three patches fix some other unnecessary use of > blacklist/whitelist and have no user visible impact. > > The rest change the PCI blacklist to be blocklist and > whitelist to be allowlist. Thanks for working on this. I agree, the first patches can go in right now. But I have some concerns about the rest. New options in EAL are not consistent with "allow"/"block" list: + "b:" /* pci-skip-probe */ + "w:" /* pci-only-probe */ +#define OPT_PCI_SKIP_PROBE "pci-skip-probe" + OPT_PCI_SKIP_PROBE_NUM = 'b', +#define OPT_PCI_ONLY_PROBE "pci-only-probe" + OPT_PCI_ONLY_PROBE_NUM = 'w', The CI flagged the series as failing, because the unit test for EAL flags is unaligned: +#define pci_allowlist "--pci-allowlist" https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/348668299#L5657 The ABI check complains about the enum update: https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/348668301#L2400 Either we deal with this, or we need a libabigail exception rule. About deprecating existing API/EAL flags in this release, this should go through the standard deprecation process. I would go with introducing new options + full compatibility + a deprecation notice in the 20.08 release. The actual deprecation/API flagging will go in 20.11. Removal will come later. -- David Marchand