[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] config: disable RTE_NEXT_ABI by default

Neil Horman nhorman at tuxdriver.com
Fri Oct 5 13:30:57 CEST 2018


On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 11:17:30AM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 10/5/2018 10:13 AM, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 05:55:34PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >> 04/10/2018 17:28, Ferruh Yigit:
> >>> On 10/4/2018 4:10 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>>> 04/10/2018 17:48, Ferruh Yigit:
> >>>>> Enabling RTE_NEXT_ABI means to enable APIs that break the ABI for
> >>>>> the current release and these APIs are targeted for further release.
> >>>>
> >>>> It seems nobody is using it in last releases.
> >>>>
> >>>>> RTE_NEXT_ABI shouldn't be enabled by default.
> >>>>
> >>>> The reason for having it enabled by default is that when you build DPDK
> >>>> yourself, you probably want the latest features.
> >>>> If packaged properly for stability, it is easy to disable it in
> >>>> the package recipe.
> >>>
> >>> My concern was (if this has been used), user may get unstable APIs and without
> >>> explicitly being aware of it.
> >>
> >> I am OK with both defaults (enabled or disabled).
> >>
> > I'd keep it as is. As said, I'm not sure it's being used right now anyway.
> 
> No, not used right now.
> But I think we can use it, did you able to find chance to check:
> 
> https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2018-October/114372.html
> 
> Option D.
> 

Just to propose something else, We also have the ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API flag
that we IIRC default to on.  Would it be worth consolidating these two
mechanisms into one?  Currently ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API lets us flag symbols that
are not yet stable, and it seems to work well.  It does not however let us
simply define out structures/variables that might adversely affect the ABI.
Would it be worth considering adding a macro (something like
__rte_experimental_symbol()), that allows a variable/struct to be defined if
ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API is set, and squashed otherwise?

Neil



More information about the dev mailing list