From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
Received: from mail.mhcomputing.net (master.mhcomputing.net [74.208.46.186])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49349C800
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 02:32:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.1.160] (99-34-229-174.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net
 [99.34.229.174])
 by mail.mhcomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1FB5980C003
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 17:30:06 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAO1kT8_C2QJUrNk-fqOQd=WmOkpvNw5jCvxEhfPdHwyCwBuyKA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 17:32:39 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CE2892E0-34AB-4DEB-940E-13530A894A01@mhcomputing.net>
References: <20150619033746.GA24292@mhcomputing.net>
 <20150619043102.GA25396@mhcomputing.net>
 <20150619101531.GC6880@bricha3-MOBL3>
 <8D38B3DE-4FA3-4053-9165-DCFC53843902@mhcomputing.net>
 <CAO1kT8_C2QJUrNk-fqOQd=WmOkpvNw5jCvxEhfPdHwyCwBuyKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "<dev@dpdk.org>" <dev@dpdk.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK v2.0.0 has different rte_eal_pci_probe()
	behavior
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 00:32:42 -0000

On Jun 21, 2015, at 3:54 PM, Tom Barbette <tom.barbette@ulg.ac.be> =
wrote:
> Application call to rte_eal_pci_probe() is not needed anymore since =
DPDK 1.8.
>=20
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-September/005890.html
>=20
> You were not wrong before, it is just a change in DPDK. I came across =
the same problem a few days ago.
>=20
> Tom Barbette

So, we have a good practical example below about ABI compatibility.

The prototype and name of the rte_eal_pci_probe() was kept exactly the =
same, and it compiled fine with no change, but it fails at runtime =
because it causes a dual-init of all the PCI devices and hits a resource =
conflict in the process.

Thus it's important to remember you can break compatibility even if the =
ABI stays the same, if the APIs themselves don't behave the same over =
time...

Matthew.