Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH V2] ethdev: add dev configured flag

From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
	Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com>,
	 Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>,
	 "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	 "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH V2] ethdev: add dev configured flag
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 12:40:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJFAV8zdHBNfiMQH+T12TOr0z-_Dv=qqAys5o9iCHj5vnPnt5w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <25012025.yGfkWu0M9X@thomas>

On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 11:59 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > This is problematic, as the following rule does not work:
> >
> > +; Ignore bitfields added in rte_eth_dev_data hole
> > +[suppress_type]
> > +        name = rte_eth_dev_data
> > +        has_data_member_inserted_between = {offset_after(lro),
> > offset_of(rx_queue_state)}
> >
> > On the other hand, a (wrong) rule with "has_data_member_inserted_at =
> > 2" (2 being the wrong offset you can read in abidiff output) works.
> >
> > This might force us to waive all changes to rte_eth_dev_data... not
> > that I am happy about it.
>
> We are not going to do other changes until 21.11, so it could be fine.

Ok, example of a global exception for the structure:

+; Ignore all changes to rte_eth_dev_data
+; Note: we only cared about dev_configured bit addition, but libabigail
+; seems to wrongly compute bitfields offset.
+; https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28060
+[suppress_type]
+        name = rte_eth_dev_data

-- 
David Marchand