[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/7] common/octeontx: enable build only on 64bit Linux

[Jerin Jacob]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:33 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net> wrote:
>
> 25/03/2021 11:58, Kinsella, Ray:
> > On 25/03/2021 10:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > 25/03/2021 11:42, Thomas Monjalon:
> > >> 24/03/2021 11:55, Jerin Jacob:
> > >>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 10:33 PM <pbhagavatula at marvell.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> From: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula at marvell.com>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Due to Linux kernel dependency, only enable build for 64bit Linux.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula at marvell.com>
> > >>>
> > >>> Series Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jerinj at marvell.com>
> > >>
> > >> I've reorganized the commits per family of drivers,
> > >> so it makes more sense than grouping per driver class
> > >> with "common/octeontx" for title for all:
> > >>
> > >> net/thunderx: enable build only on 64-bit Linux
> > >> common/octeontx: enable build only on 64-bit Linux
> > >> common/octeontx2: enable build only on 64-bit Linux
> > >>
> > >> and applied.
> > >
> > > Actually not applied yet.
> > > I'm not sure what to do for the ABI check which is broken
> > > because some drivers are not compiled anymore in 32-bit build.
> > > I've workarounded locally by removing the dump files in the reference build.
> > > Should we add an exception in libabigail.abignore?
> > >
> > In the past we said that depreciating HW support would be considered to be same as an ABI Breakage.
> >
> > From the policy ...
> > "Updates to the minimum hardware requirements, which drop support for hardware which was previously supported, should be treated as an ABI change."
>
> So the patches should wait 21.11.
> Everybody agree?

Looks good to me to postpone.

@Ray Kinsella @Thomas Monjalon  @McDaniel, Timothy @David Marchand @Neil Horman

Currently, I merged DLB v1 driver removal patch to next-eventdev. Is
this ABI breakge[1]?

http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20210316210812.15614-1-timothy.mcdaniel@intel.com/

[1]
>From the policy ...
"Updates to the minimum hardware requirements, which drop support for
hardware which was previously supported, should be treated as an ABI
change."