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 62F6CA052A; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:01:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ACF2140E36; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:01:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from dal3relay46.mxroute.com (dal3relay46.mxroute.com [64.40.27.46]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4919140E33 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:01:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from filter004.mxroute.com ([149.28.56.236] 149.28.56.236.vultr.com) (Authenticated sender: mN4UYu2MZsgR) by dal3relay46.mxroute.com (ZoneMTA) with ESMTPSA id 17738fddacd000d98d.001 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256); Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:01:36 +0000 X-Zone-Loop: 9f115666fb9c46efda7cb80539f876a751bb0aaf14cd X-Originating-IP: [149.28.56.236] Received: from echo.mxrouting.net (echo.mxrouting.net [116.202.222.109]) by filter004.mxroute.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87F4A3E858 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:01:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ashroe.eu; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=H4nhT/ykx2tRNb7DZrmxl43RNeMNbWZ9c/K1OCI70FU=; b=fUE39ivQafkrnSPV6oCTjD31DZ qMBGum8JCzuP0F9Q7W/SOCe26+lLB/w91ZoghTZQLquIFzBoIfk3gr70nQ4zbFoaAsJHkAggqADuu ov3JPf4qfUtE5svkXMr+FYCMMRcCBJFAGN3sk0jo2NK2RERLMz+exmC0lxl0/U3vU3SCg4gqXxWWp fSl+8tiWiBVz/pEMy7LtassiwYBofvBNpDAj4u8jbVJtJEM2xjuo/ljkS7NcYSURRQ135nLWQobn5 D9YuUiHOn5lqLb0zoJjswDaSnOBksXsGEVHKDCqX6DNWtDhmk1SnrVI3617Kqi9AbqkLLsHmuy7I4 umTEupcw==; To: dev@dpdk.org References: <20201014183136.22239-1-dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com> <5444857.Q0qPc8oPp2@thomas> <20210123012403.1bdb35d0@sovereign> <14261305.cmbqrkYmuW@thomas> From: "Kinsella, Ray" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:01:33 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AuthUser: mdr@ashroe.eu Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/3] build: use Python pmdinfogen 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" On 25/01/2021 09:25, Kinsella, Ray wrote: > > > On 23/01/2021 11:38, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >> 22/01/2021 23:24, Dmitry Kozlyuk: >>> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 21:57:15 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>> 22/01/2021 21:31, Dmitry Kozlyuk: >>>>> On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:24:21 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>> 20/01/2021 08:23, Dmitry Kozlyuk: >>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 01:05:59 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>>>> This is now the right timeframe to introduce this change >>>>>>>> with the new Python module dependency. >>>>>>>> Unfortunately, the ABI check is returning an issue: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 'const char mlx5_common_pci_pmd_info[62]' was changed >>>>>>>> to 'const char mlx5_common_pci_pmd_info[60]' at rte_common_mlx5.pmd.c >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Will investigate and fix ASAP. >>>>> >>>>> Now that I think of it: strings like this change every time new PCI IDs are >>>>> added to a PMD, but AFAIK adding PCI IDs is not considered an ABI breakage, >>>>> is it? One example is 28c9a7d7b48e ("net/mlx5: add ConnectX-6 Lx device ID") >>>>> added 2020-07-08, i.e. clearly outside of ABI change window. >>>> >>>> You're right. >>>> >>>>> "xxx_pmd_info" changes are due to JSON formatting (new is more canonical), >>>>> which can be worked around easily, if the above is wrong. >>>> >>>> If the new format is better, please keep it. >>>> What we need is an exception for the pmdinfo symbols >>>> in the file devtools/libabigail.abignore. >>>> You can probably use a regex for these symbols. >>> >>> This would allow real breakages to pass ABI check, abidiff doesn't analyze >>> variable content and it's not easy to compare. Maybe later a script can be >>> added that checks lines with RTE_DEVICE_IN in patches. There are at most 32 of >>> 5494 relevant commits between 19.11 and 20.11, though. >>> >>> To verify there are no meaningful changes I ensured empty diff between >>> results of the following command for "main" and the branch: >>> >>> find build/drivers -name '*.so' -exec usertools/dpdk-pmdinfo.py >> >> For now we cannot do such check as part of the ABI checker. >> And we cannot merge this patch if the ABI check fails. >> I think the only solution is to allow any change in the pmdinfo variables. >> > > So my 2c on this is that this is an acceptable work-around for the v21 (DPDK v20.11) ABI. > However we are going to end up carrying this rule in libabigail.ignore indefinitely. > > Would it make sense to just fix the size of _pmd_info to some reasonably large value - > say 128 bytes, to allow us to drop the rule in the DPDK 21.11 v22 release? > > Ray K Another point is - shouldn't _pmd_info probably live in "INTERNAL" is anycase?