[dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] DPDK ABI/API Stability

Stephen Hemminger stephen at networkplumber.org
Thu Apr 4 17:51:27 CEST 2019


On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 11:54:47 +0100
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:

> My thoughts on the matter are:
> 1. I think we really need to do work to start hiding more of our data
> structures - like what Stephen's latest RFC does. This hiding should reduce
> the scope for ABI breaks.
> 2. Once done, I think we should commit to having an ABI break only in the
> rarest of circumstances, and only with very large justification. I want us
> to get to the point where DPDK releases can immediately be picked up by all
> linux distros and rolled out because they are ABI compatible.

I would also like to propose "you get one ABI break" which means each
API/ABI change must hide more infrastructure than the last. This is
the "fool me once, ..." saying in API's.

For example,
the memory rework it would have been good if the structure of mempools etc
were hidden inside EAL and not exposed. but as usual hindsight is 20/20


More information about the dev mailing list