From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] eal: provide functions to access PCI
	config
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 18:34:44 +0200
Message-ID: <10804961.SkRqr2DsGC@xps13>
References: <1436314095-21574-1-git-send-email-stephen@networkplumber.org>
 <d35efa226d95495e804181b2246063d2@HQ1WP-EXMB11.corp.brocade.com>
 <20150708091159.78e2998a@urahara>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Stephen Hemminger <shemming@brocade.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com
 [209.85.212.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90CEA3B5
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  8 Jul 2015 18:35:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wiwl6 with SMTP id l6so350212192wiw.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 08 Jul 2015 09:35:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150708091159.78e2998a@urahara>
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>

2015-07-08 09:11, Stephen Hemminger:
> On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 15:04:16 +0000
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> 
> > 2015-07-07 17:08, Stephen Hemminger:
> > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map
> > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map
> > > @@ -98,3 +98,8 @@ DPDK_2.0 {
> > >  
> > >         local: *;
> > >  };
> > > +
> > > +DPDK_2.1 {
> > > +       rte_eal_pci_read_config;
> > > +       rte_eal_pci_write_config;
> > > +};  
> > 
> > DPDK_2.0 is missing to make 2.1 node inheriting from 2.0 one.
> 
> Do you mean that it is ok to add functions but keep same ABI version?

No. It's explained there:
	http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/tree/doc/guides/guidelines/versioning.rst#n209
"
   DPDK_2.1 {
        global:
        rte_acl_create;

   } DPDK_2.0;

The addition of the new block tells the linker that a new version node is
available (DPDK_2.1), which contains the symbol rte_acl_create, and inherits the
symbols from the DPDK_2.0 node.
"