From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: rename
	rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 16:51:02 +0200
Message-ID: <2821398.avzWtSOKrm@xps13>
References: <1433492166-30758-1-git-send-email-jingjing.wu@intel.com>
 <1433917473-21508-2-git-send-email-jingjing.wu@intel.com>
 <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F8C59FF9@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com
 [209.85.212.175]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECB4FCE7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  7 Jul 2015 16:52:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wiga1 with SMTP id a1so259198530wig.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 07:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F8C59FF9@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.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>

2015-06-26 07:03, Wu, Jingjing:
> Hi, Neil
> 
> About this patch I have an ABI concern about it. 
> This patch just renamed a struct rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf to
> rte_eth_mirror_conf, the size and its elements don't change.
> As my understanding, it will not break the ABI. And I also tested it.
> But when I use the script ./scripts/validate-abi.sh to check.
> A low severity problem is reported in symbol "rte_eth_mirror_rule_set"
>  - Change: "Base type of 2nd parameter mirror_conf has been changed
>  from struct rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf to struct rte_eth_mirror_conf."
>  - Effect: "Replacement of parameter base type may indicate a change
>  in its semantic meaning."
> 
> So, I'm not sure whether this patch meet the ABI policy?

I think it's OK.

> Additional, about the validate-abi.sh, does it mean we need to fix
> all the problems it reports? Or we can decide case by case.
> Can a Low Severity problem be acceptable?

We have to decide case by case.
It makes ABI checking impossible to automate.
That's why any help is welcome to check the git HEAD for ABI violation.