On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 2:05 PM Kundapura, Ganapati
<ganapati.kundap...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Jerin,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: 11 October 2021 21:44
> > To: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundap...@intel.com>
> > Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Jayatheerthan, Jay
> > > +que_id"); }
> > > diff --git a/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.h
> > > b/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.h
> > > index 70ca427..acabed4 100644
> > > --- a/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.h
> > > +++ b/lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.h
> > > @@ -216,6 +216,10 @@ struct rte_event_eth_rx_adapter_stats {
> > > /**< Eventdev enqueue count */
> > > uint64_t rx_enq_retry;
> > > /**< Eventdev enqueue retry count */
> > > + uint64_t rx_event_buf_count;
> > > + /**< Rx event buffered count */
> > > + uint64_t rx_event_buf_size;
> >
> >
> > Isn't ABI breakage? CI did not warn this. Isn't this a public structure?
> Please confirm if moving the above two members to end of the structure
> overcomes ABI breakage?
+ @Ray Kinsella @Thomas Monjalon @David Marchand
It will still break the ABI. IMO, Since it is an ABI breaking release
it is OK. If there are no other objections, Please move the variable
to end
of the structure and update release notes for ABI changes.
> >
> >
> >
> > > + /**< Rx event buffer size */
> > > uint64_t rx_dropped;
> > > /**< Received packet dropped count */
> > > uint64_t rx_enq_start_ts;
> > > --
> > > 2.6.4
> > >
