On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 10:24:42PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-06-26 10:54, Neil Horman: > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 03:00:17PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 2015-06-25 10:35, Neil Horman: > > > > +* ``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. > > When fixed, this series can be applied. > > > > > +* ``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. > > No line in the sand, but it seems better to remove it to avoid confusing > people. > ABI compat is already enough difficult to understand ;) > > > > [...] > > > > +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? > > Yes it is. > I thought it was needed to insist on the existence of a new symbol while the > old one still exists. Just trying to be didactic. > Ah, no its not a mandate (though doing so is an optional aproach, which trades off the need to use MAP_STATIC_SYMBOL for the maintain a public symbol with the same name). I can include an alternate example of the same exercize that follows that approach, but given our time contraints would rather to that in a follow up patch series
Neil