From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemming@brocade.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/12] abi: fix v2.1 abi broken issue
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 08:27:22 -0700
Message-ID: <20150529082722.26b22923@urahara>
References: <1432198563-16334-1-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com>
 <1432889125-20255-1-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com>
 <1432889125-20255-13-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com
 [67.231.144.122]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183C05A57
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 29 May 2015 17:28:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0048193.ppops.net [127.0.0.1])
 by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with SMTP id t4TFH0ob015722
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:28:39 -0700
Received: from hq1wp-exchub01.corp.brocade.com ([144.49.131.13])
 by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1up6gk293n-1
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT)
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:28:39 -0700
In-Reply-To: <1432889125-20255-13-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Fri, 29 May 2015 16:45:25 +0800
Cunming Liang <cunming.liang@intel.com> wrote:

> +#ifdef RTE_EAL_RX_INTR
> +extern int
>  rte_eth_dev_rx_intr_ctl(uint8_t port_id, int epfd, int op, void *data);
> +#else
> +static inline int
> +rte_eth_dev_rx_intr_ctl(uint8_t port_id, int epfd, int op, void *data)
> +{
> +	RTE_SET_USED(port_id);
> +	RTE_SET_USED(epfd);
> +	RTE_SET_USED(op);
> +	RTE_SET_USED(data);
> +	return -1;
> +}
> +#endif

Doing ABI compatibility is good but hard.

I think it would be better not to provide the functions for rx_intr_ctl unless
the feature was configured on. That way anyone using them with incorrect config
would detect failure at build time, rather than run time.

Also, doesn't some doc file have to be updated for the announcement?