On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 03:00:17PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-06-25 10:35, Neil Horman: > > v3) > > * Fixed in tact -> intact > > * Added docs to address static linking > > * Removed duplicate documentation from release notes > > It seems you missed some of my previous comments. > > [...] > > +* ``VERSION_SYMBOL(b, e, n)``: Creates a symbol version table entry binding > > + unversioned symbol ``b`` to the internal function ``b_e``. > > Should a versioned symbol <b>@DPDK_<n> > Sure.
> > +* ``BASE_SYMBOL(b, e)``: Creates a symbol version table entry binding > > + unversioned symbol ``b`` to the internal function ``b_e``. > > Please give a use case of BASE_SYMBOL. > No, I'd rather remove it if you really insist. As noted before the way we set up the version map files means we currently have no need for this particular directive. I only included it for completeness. I think an example use in light of that fact would only confuse people. If you're going to draw a line in the sand around it, I'll just remove it. > [...] > > +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. > > which contains the old version of the symbol rte_acl_create > I don't understand, is it not obvious that the DPDK_2.0 node contains the 2.0 version of the symbol and the DPDK_2.1 node contains the 2.1 version of the symbol? Neil