Hi Ferruh, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yigit at intel.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 2:53 PM > To: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain at nxp.com>; Thomas Monjalon > <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; viktorin at rehivetech.com; David Marchand > <david.marchand at 6wind.com>; Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 00/24] Introducing rte_driver/rte_device > generalization > > On 10/17/2016 6:29 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote: > > Hi Ferruh, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yigit at intel.com] > >> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 7:13 PM > >> To: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain at nxp.com>; Thomas Monjalon > >> <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> > >> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; viktorin at rehivetech.com; David Marchand > >> <david.marchand at 6wind.com>; Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com> > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 00/24] Introducing > rte_driver/rte_device > >> generalization > >> > >> On 10/5/2016 12:57 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote: > >>> Hi Thomas, > >>> > >>> On Tuesday 04 October 2016 01:12 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>>> 2016-10-04 12:21, Shreyansh Jain: > >>>>> Hi Thomas, > >>>>> > >>>>> On Monday 03 October 2016 07:58 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>>>>> Applied, thanks everybody for the great (re)work! > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks! > >>>>> > >>> [...] > >>> [...] > >>>>> > >>>>> It can be merged with changes for: > >>>>> - drv_name > >>>>> - EAL_ before _REGISTER_ macros > >>>>> - eth_driver => rte_driver naming > >>>> > >>>> Good. > >>>> Could you make it this week, please? > >>>> > >>> > >>> Certainly. At least some of those I can send within this week :) > >>> > >> > >> > >> I caught while running ABI validation script today, I think this patch > >> should increase LIBABIVER of: > >> - lib/librte_cryptodev > >> - lib/librte_eal > >> - lib/librte_ether > > > > Should I be referring to [1] for understanding how/when to change the > LIBABIVER? > > > > [1] http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.html > > Yes, this is the document. > > Briefly, if library becomes incompatible with existing applications, > LIBABIVER needs to be increased to indicate this. > > Increasing LIBABIVER changes dynamic library name and so_name, and this > cause existing application do not work with this new library. Not > increasing the LIBABIVER, app may start running but can have segfault or > can generate wrong values. So increasing LIBABIVER is to inform user and > prevent surprises.
Thanks for explanation. I understand. I will send across another patch for this. - Shreyansh