[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: promote some service core functions to stable

Eads, Gage gage.eads at intel.com
Thu Jun 20 20:39:27 CEST 2019


> Gage Eads <gage.eads at intel.com> writes:
> 
> > The functions rte_service_may_be_active(),
> > rte_service_lcore_attr_get(), and rte_service_attr_reset_all() were
> > introduced nearly a year ago in DPDK 18.08. They can be considered non-
> experimental for the 19.08 release.
> >
> > rte_service_may_be_active() is used by eventdev and the sw PMD, and
> > this commit allows them to not need any experimental API.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/event/sw/Makefile                   |  1 -
> >  drivers/event/sw/meson.build                |  1 -
> >  lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_service.h | 15 +++------------
> >  lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c         |  6 +++---
> >  lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map          |  6 +++---
> >  lib/librte_eventdev/Makefile                |  1 -
> >  lib/librte_eventdev/meson.build             |  1 -
> >  7 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/event/sw/Makefile b/drivers/event/sw/Makefile
> > index 81236a392..c6600e836 100644
> > --- a/drivers/event/sw/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/event/sw/Makefile
> > @@ -7,7 +7,6 @@ include $(RTE_SDK)/mk/rte.vars.mk  LIB =
> > librte_pmd_sw_event.a
> >
> >  # build flags
> > -CFLAGS += -DALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API
> >  CFLAGS += -O3
> >  CFLAGS += $(WERROR_FLAGS)
> >  # for older GCC versions, allow us to initialize an event using diff
> > --git a/drivers/event/sw/meson.build b/drivers/event/sw/meson.build
> > index 30d221647..985012219 100644
> > --- a/drivers/event/sw/meson.build
> > +++ b/drivers/event/sw/meson.build
> > @@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
> >  # SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause  # Copyright(c) 2017 Intel
> > Corporation
> >
> > -allow_experimental_apis = true
> 
> I don't think you can remove these.  There are still some experimental APIs
> (f.e. the rename for rte_cryptodev_sym_session_get_private_data
> marked that function as experimental and it will cause build breakage).
> 
> Maybe I'm mis understanding it?  It would be good to get verification from
> Bruce whether that API should not be marked as experimental (it was just a
> rename, so not sure...) - maybe that's a follow up for this patch?
> 
> See: https://travis-ci.com/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/209722145 for an example
> 
> The odd thing is I only see it on the clang builds - perhaps it's a missing
> definition for the clang compiler.
> 

You're right, eventdev still uses that experimental API (which this patch is unrelated to). I tested this change with GCC (5.4.0) and it built without errors, which I took to mean no more experimental APIs were in use. That's concerning that GCC didn't catch it.

At any rate, I'll correct this in v2.

Thanks,
Gage


More information about the dev mailing list