[RFC v3 00/26] Bus and device cleanup for 22.11

[Walker, Benjamin]

> From: David Marchand <david.marchand at redhat.com>
> 
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 1:19 AM Harris, James R <james.r.harris at intel.com>
> wrote:
> > Can we keep rte_pci_register(), or a new variation of it that keeps
> > the rte_pci_driver structure hidden?  Hiding rte_pci_register() would
> > mean SPDK can no longer work with a packaged DPDK.  Or the DPDK
> > packages would need to set enable_driver_sdk which I suspect is not the
> intent.
> 
> What do you think if SPDK maintains a copy of the internal headers?
> 
> The internal API are not supposed to change that often, but we (DPDK) won't
> guarantee it.
> This would still put some maintenance burden on SPDK but I think it is a good
> compromise.
>

Would these internal symbols be considered part of the public/official ABI? When
SPDK goes to dynamically load a shared DPDK library, how can we detect
whether it's a version that we support linking against?

 
> I did a PoC this morning and put patches in my forked repo:
> https://github.com/david-marchand/spdk/commits/master
> 
> 
> --
> David Marchand