Hi David, On 02/15/2016 10:58 AM, Hunt, David wrote: > On 12/02/2016 15:50, Olivier MATZ wrote: >> - NEXT_ABI does make the code harder to read in this case, and I'm >> thinking about the patchset from David Hunt (external mempool handler) >> that will be in the same situation, and maybe also another patchset >> I'm working on. > > Olivier, > I'm working on that at the moment with the external mempool handler > code. However, it crossed my mind that we have a choice to use symbol > versioning OR use NEXT_ABI. Would one method be preferred over the other?
I think symbol versioning should always be preferred when possible. In your case, as far as I remember, your are updating the rte_mempool structure, which is accessed by static inline functions. I don't think it is easily manageable with symbol versioning. Moreover, the ABI will already be broken by Keith's patch, so I think it's less problematic to have other patches breaking the ABI at the same time. Regards, Olivier