From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: Stanislaw Kardach <kda@semihalf.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
Vladimir Medvedkin <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, Frank Zhao <Frank.Zhao@starfivetech.com>,
Sam Grove <sam.grove@sifive.com>,
upstream@semihalf.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] lpm: add const to lpm arg of rte_lpm_lookup
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 09:43:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2111317.Mh6RI2rZIc@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Ypm4PvKmVvpBy2ff@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
03/06/2022 09:29, Bruce Richardson:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 10:52:25PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 01/06/2022 13:15, Stanislaw Kardach:
> > > All other rte_lpm_lookup* functions take lpm argument as a const. As the
> > > basic rte_lpm_lookup() performs the same function, it should also do
> > > that.
> > >
> > > As this function is inline, no API/ABI change happens.
> >
> > It is an API change and should be noted in the release notes.
> >
> > > static inline int
> > > -rte_lpm_lookup(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint32_t *next_hop)
> > > +rte_lpm_lookup(const struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint32_t *next_hop)
> >
> While I've no particular objection to it appearing in the RN doc, I wonder
> whether it really counts as an API change. I can't see any practical
> difference that this change would make to the end user - no source code
> needs updating for example.
Yes you're right, we can skip the release notes here.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-03 7:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-01 11:15 [PATCH v4 1/2] lpm: add const to lpm arg of rte_lpm_lookup Stanislaw Kardach
2022-06-01 11:15 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] lpm: add a scalar version of lookupx4 function Stanislaw Kardach
2022-06-01 11:52 ` Medvedkin, Vladimir
2022-06-03 9:23 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-06-02 20:52 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] lpm: add const to lpm arg of rte_lpm_lookup Thomas Monjalon
2022-06-03 7:29 ` Bruce Richardson
2022-06-03 7:43 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2111317.Mh6RI2rZIc@thomas \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=Frank.Zhao@starfivetech.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=kda@semihalf.com \
--cc=sam.grove@sifive.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=upstream@semihalf.com \
--cc=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.