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 CBCD4A0548; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:31:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB1C54181B; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:31:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-il1-f174.google.com (mail-il1-f174.google.com [209.85.166.174]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A915341735 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:30:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-il1-f174.google.com with SMTP id v13so16342684ilj.8 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 08:30:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xUbC+2fVu/4gPswkRY9mjMnDVwSq69xmjmd5YwZayAY=; b=fGNANKV6Vd5antVd6mbO53Lp0tJdb7k4RKB+/HxRvNn//FgZ59+W32ZxtEXj8Sq4fC tbzQkw7+QCdB7ZOuApoSfMfMjwc03+FNhSLG2G6PpOPRmkxmPjumSZUgnqxxqGesIZ5k 7cxf6UPH3Cc0kLUkRBMw7g+9SULisNcczDYAs= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xUbC+2fVu/4gPswkRY9mjMnDVwSq69xmjmd5YwZayAY=; b=IiwVoB357nwdKysTLH6SajymyGNhlMIA+1gC2wiNruZWnL0Givl7e8qpqQFeN8II78 GZr7BhBQb569J1wfwUrzEBgNzjSy/OXW3dZmiYYHd+7+mxBwiYI6Dr/OXMYwt5BcZQOu T6BkS1hGlAjKNidd/B36r2hnmm6oABPlnBj5EmjOBbRNAak5DQ8B5sTYnSlaTATcZBe+ 8Yeh7/RBQaFdsCchJyqsUI0maIt8Y6/u1g9CIqGhVNAmXGPjwpo6SSQ0QymO51RQSFpk OMg64PwulUgkVcPdsR7vTOhjZojRbZ9VJBhLNrf9K6ja3hzzHbsGtcnFXZ+CoMZoVtqQ GV1A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530znYGPbXO4MpST4Kgli2vdCB4RVH0Z0NLd2r0LjCK1eF43cMKI bNqOpndhqK+9TKRDgVLE6GZQdlMHFV6GHtPpPzvxhlYZiIWR6g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyG22HEzdo6A9VtoUjyck/qWG1f7IvnRDFEkb1W+zBL3n8hGhueEpodCheoMcddoW6IVqLlXbH6SmKiQtvUBcA= X-Received: by 2002:a92:c048:: with SMTP id o8mr22537679ilf.147.1618932658746; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 08:30:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Brandon Lo Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 11:30:22 -0400 Message-ID: To: dev , ci@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: [dpdk-dev] UNH-IOL ABI Failures 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 Sender: "dev" Hi all, We have noticed some failures occurring repeatedly in our CI system regarding the ABI test. I looked into the failures and saw that there were some failures caused by a clock skew issue on the ARM ABI test. Those failures have been rerun and the report will be resent to patchworks for the updated result. However, the earlier test runs seem to report an actual failure: "1 function with some indirect sub-type change: [C]'function rte_security_session* rte_security_session_create(rte_security_ctx*, rte_security_session_conf*, rte_mempool*, rte_mempool*)' at rte_security.c:43:1 has some indirect sub-type changes: parameter 2 of type 'rte_security_session_conf*' has sub-type changes: in pointed to type 'struct rte_security_session_conf' at rte_security.h:366:1: type size hasn't changed 1 data member change: type of 'rte_crypto_sym_xform* rte_security_session_conf::crypto_xform' changed: in pointed to type 'struct rte_crypto_sym_xform' at rte_crypto_sym.h:575:1: type size hasn't changed 1 data member changes (1 filtered): Error: ABI issue reported for 'abidiff --suppr dpdk/devtools/libabigail.abignore --no-added-syms --headers-dir1 reference/usr/local/include --headers-dir2 build/usr/local/include reference/dump/librte_security.dump build/dump/librte_security.dump' ABIDIFF_ABI_CHANGE, this change requires a review (abidiff flagged this as a potential issue)." Can anyone please confirm that this is a real ABI issue or if this requires a change on the UNH-IOL side. Thanks, Brandon -- Brandon Lo UNH InterOperability Laboratory 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824 blo@iol.unh.edu www.iol.unh.edu