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 9DFF1A0527; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:07:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88E735F18; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:07:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 352F15B30 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:07:37 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1604938055; 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=8VAEAELqwvQIbekaX0KeOQaFMlERFg3GvQ292L/X/tM=; b=jPj//auzMYydjcPzvHwCzSwT32kh1A8hvhGRrl1j5WrSAVFth8arrRadoZeZs4FwkInv0W Q4r5gzeiGcvWdqAjhYeNIPFrpe5bfbElsd/5dxq9BI2ktlCkNS2sZT7tOGXUn4N/NsPWBF Ekb36/QuRIRvcqW6lWXPk+AVGSwaMxk= Received: from mail-vk1-f197.google.com (mail-vk1-f197.google.com [209.85.221.197]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-517-ziQTyfNYMHu2aaW_iGlYQg-1; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:07:33 -0500 X-MC-Unique: ziQTyfNYMHu2aaW_iGlYQg-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f197.google.com with SMTP id g3so364643vkl.13 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 08:07:33 -0800 (PST) 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=8VAEAELqwvQIbekaX0KeOQaFMlERFg3GvQ292L/X/tM=; b=s7Z3e/e+05NYUBHjheN9Z1nmOWLKr1kHhtPO6AIwB12i6W+9MeQ7A/9MDg9W+wBd8b n2N2tYDGP+3PYNL5/qUinK8t/ssHGDZ/lH7Zlt5qA1n9yeOAryf82B2T4ROe5CfbpCBm yDMHfLtDE8t3ERxDTi0kl9uF5nUNAQ5+gxUOWMG/HOQEDZLMEqyXKXwRUmjRzVuDVZUl 1NM2DmC/PGOO/kUA7Ix+uDQGSIAfenmHBdWfUF9P6KtVitKmQKEXzkxJ+lJsbog/bSaH dV9DVvUDXRtpbbfK4wWiLjm7wIUcapog2RIMmKdERc0YiNVKgXRJgIRm/gWQovdvZAGE 3lxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5319pVeKiMnWrR/jJODx9H4niZtnOY53zyGQUvJQL9aj8jMbgjH1 KcRb3JFKTbAjsqZr1sk2LuxJes8m+dvvoGYnAezJUP2J112ZHO8z7j3iR54p6HWM2FaWwQxMqzk db2GeLnPQBy6nqfTVcbY= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:23d6:: with SMTP id j205mr6685666vkj.20.1604938051797; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 08:07:31 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxrRA7GR+yj6Q+modI4VrVB2rE6HX0UxzzxFr73K3tApeEQgtIuQ6kiu1sjcPlYh2DacluFIxTr2TZx+LcLR9M= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:23d6:: with SMTP id j205mr6685171vkj.20.1604938047514; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 08:07:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200922143202.8755-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20201105223602.5965-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20201105223602.5965-2-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20201109134931.GG831@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <20201109075440.44130509@hermes.local> <20201109160548.GJ831@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20201109160548.GJ831@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> From: David Marchand Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:07:16 +0100 Message-ID: To: Bruce Richardson Cc: Stephen Hemminger , Thomas Monjalon , dev , Luca Boccassi , Gaetan Rivet Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 1/6] eal: replace usage of blacklist/whitelist in enum 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 Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:06 PM Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:03:06PM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 4:55 PM Stephen Hemminger > > wrote: > > > > This patch causes build failures which persist until patch 3, because of > > > > these deprecations. I think you need to define the backward-compatibility > > > > macros here, but only mark them deprecated at the end of the set. > > > > > > > > /Bruce > > > > > > Is building without warnings in every step that important? > > > The previous patch series for master/slave had the same effect > > > > Thomas fixed it while applying. > > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/cover/80987/#122107 > > > > > In this case I believe the below needs to be applied to patch 1, and then > the inverse of it set as patch 4 to mark the compatibility macros as > deprecated. Or just squash the patches and be done with it, like I already commented. No one cares about this series anyway. -- David Marchand