Hi David,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Marchand <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 11:22 PM
> To: Gavin Hu <[email protected]>
> Cc: Kevin Traynor <[email protected]>; Bruce Richardson
> <[email protected]>; Morten Brørup
> <[email protected]>; Ferruh Yigit <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; nd <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <[email protected]>; Ruifeng Wang
> <[email protected]>; Phil Yang <[email protected]>; Joyce Kong
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Olivier MATZ
> <[email protected]>; Konstantin Ananyev
> <[email protected]>; Andrew Rybchenko
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mbuf: replace zero-length
> marker with unnamed union
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 5:05 PM Gavin Hu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Kevin Traynor <[email protected]>
> > > Hi Gavin, I lost track if v2 is still a candidate for merge. fwiw, it
> > > compiles without giving the zero-length-bounds warning on my system.
> > >
> > > Kevin.
> >
> > Yes, this path alone is a candidate for merge.
>
> This patch is not mergeable, it would trigger failures in the ABI checks.
Isn't it a false failure? If yes, is it ignorable?
>
> You can see in patchwork that the robot reported a warning in Travis.
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2020-March/119919.html
> https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/295652710#L4476
>
>
> I opened a bz to libabigail.
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25661
>
>
> Either a different solution is found, or your patch will have to deal
> with this issue (libabigail fix won't be ready soon afaik) and waive
> this.
Maybe we come back to 'disable the warning', before the libabigail fix ready?
or alternatively ignore this ABI false failure, if it is.
I do not have ideas of what otherwise the options are.
>
> --
> David Marchand
