[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] common/mlx5: remove devx depndency on ibv and dv

David Marchand david.marchand at redhat.com
Thu Apr 9 09:24:34 CEST 2020


Hello,

On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 7:12 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/1/2020 10:59 AM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ophir Munk <ophirmu at mellanox.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 1:32 AM
> >> To: dev at dpdk.org; Matan Azrad <matan at mellanox.com>
> >> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>; Olga Shern
> >> <olgas at mellanox.com>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at mellanox.com>; Ophir
> >> Munk <ophirmu at mellanox.com>; Asaf Penso <asafp at mellanox.com>
> >> Subject: [PATCH v1] common/mlx5: remove devx depndency on ibv and dv
> >>
> >> File mlx5_devx_cmds.c should contain pure DevX calls. It must be OS
> >> agnostic and not include any references to ibv or dv structs (defined in
> >> ibverbs and rdma-core linux libraries).  This commit replaces all ibv and
> >> dv references with 'void *'.  Specifically, the following struct were
> >> replaced:
> >> 1. struct ibv_context *
> >> 2. struct ibv_qp *
> >> 3. struct mlx5dv_devx_cmd_comp *
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ophir Munk <ophirmu at mellanox.com>
> >
> > Patch applied to next-net-mlx,
> >
>
> Hi David,
>
> This patch is failing in the travis for ABI checks [1], since mlx has APIs now
> [2], are they public APIs or internal ones, and are they part of the ABI policy,
> can you please check this?

- What I see on patchwork and test-report ml for this patch:
http://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/67367/

Ophir proposed a patch on 03/30.

The robot reported an issue on 03/30, and I suppose Ophir got a report.
https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2020-March/122623.html
https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/308057800#L2337

Matan acked the patch on 03/31.

Rasland merged the patch on 04/01.

I understand that the abi checks are not perfect, and people need help
with the new abi checks.
Prove me wrong, but here, I get the feeling that it was just ignored
by 3 people in a row.


- On the question if these should be public API or internal, that is
not for me to reply/investigate.
This is a question for Mellanox.


-- 
David Marchand



More information about the dev mailing list