[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/3] devtools: create internal ignore file for libabigail

[Ophir Munk]

Thanks all for this discussion. I have sent v2 of this patchset.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 5:23 PM
> To: David Marchand <david.marchand at redhat.com>; Ophir Munk
> <ophirmu at mellanox.com>; Ray Kinsella <mdr at ashroe.eu>
> Cc: dev <dev at dpdk.org>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at mellanox.com>;
> Matan Azrad <matan at mellanox.com>; Neil Horman
> <nhorman at tuxdriver.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/3] devtools: create internal ignore file
> for libabigail
> 
> 06/05/2020 16:15, Ray Kinsella:
> >
> > On 06/05/2020 13:52, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > 06/05/2020 14:42, David Marchand:
> > >> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 2:27 PM Thomas Monjalon
> <thomas at monjalon.net> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> 05/05/2020 16:53, David Marchand:
> > >>>> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 1:21 PM Ophir Munk
> <ophirmu at mellanox.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> +; These functions were moved from stable to internal.
> > >>>>> +; This is a temporary exception till DPDK 20.11.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This is not until 20.11 if we merge this patch now.
> > >>>> It is only when comparing 20.02 to 20.05.
> > >>>> After this, symbols will be marked INTERNAL and will be skipped
> > >>>> by the generic rule, so we can remove this exception in 20.08-rc0.
> > >>>
> > >>> I think we need to keep this rule until 20.11, because we want to
> > >>> ignore symbols which were in 19.11 and 20.02, and removed (as
> > >>> internal) in 20.05.
> > >>
> > >> Those symbols were exported in 20.02.
> > >
> > > Right, no issue when comparing with 19.11.
> >
> > Right, which also makes it different to the Traffic Manager issue.
> > As these symbols where never in v20 - 19.11, they won't be missed.
> > We never had a commitment to maintain them.
> >
> > If there were in v20, the situation might be considered differently.
> >
> > >
> > >> Before this, they were internal to mlx5 net driver.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> If we remove this rule in 20.08, and comparing with 19.11, the
> > >>> tool will complain about removed symbols, isn't it?
> > >>
> > >> If we remove the rule in 20.08 and compare to _20.02_ then yes, we
> > >> would get an issue.
> > >> I was only thinking of comparing 20.08 with 20.05.
> > >>
> > >> We can keep this until 20.11 if you think it is safer.
> > >
> > > Yes I think we must make sure any comparison can be done during
> > > compatibility lifetime.
> >
> > As David said, 20.08 _should_ be being compared to 20.05 by the CI.
> > So it should be find to drop the rule then.
> 
> "should", but users "could" do something else ;-)
> 
> > However
> > It might make easier though to let libabigail.ignore accumulate these
> > kind of suppressions between major releases / lts (v20 -> v21),  and
> > the completely reset, and start over.
> 
> Yes it's simpler and safer.
>