> > Promote the adapter functions and rte_event_port_unlinks_in_progress() > > as stable as it's been added for a while now and multiple drivers and test > > application like test-eventdev has been tested using the adapter APIs. > > > > Cc: nikhil....@intel.com > > Cc: erik.g.carri...@intel.com > > Cc: abhinandan.guj...@intel.com > > Cc: pbhagavat...@marvell.com > > Cc: hemant.agra...@nxp.com > > Cc: nipun.gu...@nxp.com > > Cc: harry.van.haa...@intel.com > > Cc: mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com > > Cc: liang.j...@intel.com > > > > Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com> > > --- > > /** > > - * @warning > > - * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice > > - * > > * Register callback to process Rx packets, this is supported for > > * SW based packet transfers. > > * @see rte_event_eth_rx_cb_fn > > @@ -501,7 +453,7 @@ int > > rte_event_eth_rx_adapter_service_id_get(uint8_t id, uint32_t *service_id); > > * - 0: Success > > * - <0: Error code on failure. > > */ > > -int __rte_experimental > > +int > > rte_event_eth_rx_adapter_cb_register(uint8_t id, > > uint16_t eth_dev_id, > > rte_event_eth_rx_adapter_cb_fn cb_fn, > > Sorry for the delay in reply, I would like to retain the > rte_event_eth_rx_adapter_cb_register() function as experimental. > I will be posting a patch for this function to accept events instead of mbufs. > > Since Thomas just applied the patch, should I be posting a new patch that > reverts the lines above ?
Sorry I hesitated to wait more for your feedback. Guessing the right time to apply a patch is a difficult heuristic :) Yes please send a patch to revert for this function.
