From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: make driver names consistent Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 14:26:18 +0200 Message-ID: <3275371.bJj3maL3jb@xps13> References: <1472077494-164532-1-git-send-email-pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com> <7993435.bReMuqSN60@xps13> <20161019100543.GQ16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: Jan Blunck , "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" , dev@dpdk.org, "Mcnamara, John" To: Yuanhan Liu Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f54.google.com (mail-lf0-f54.google.com [209.85.215.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE5412B86 for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 14:26:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf0-f54.google.com with SMTP id b81so21879301lfe.1 for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 05:26:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20161019100543.GQ16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2016-10-19 18:05, Yuanhan Liu: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 06:46:40PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2016-10-18 22:18, Yuanhan Liu: > > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 03:42:54PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > 2016-10-18 21:06, Yuanhan Liu: > > > > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:50:16PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote: > > > > > > >From my understanding this is a massive API breakage. This forces all > > > > > > existing users of the virtual PMDs to change with zero benefit. Even > > > > > > if that isn't enough it also makes it impossible to switch between > > > > > > releases by recompiling. > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we please revert these changes and work on some aliasing support > > > > > > for the PMDs to fix it long term? > > > > > > > > > > +1. Aliasing is also something I would suggest before making such renames. > > > > > > > > It is a brutal change, yes. > > > > It was announced in 16.07 release notes though. > > > > > > Yes, but it still took me a while (by running git bisect) to figure out > > > what went wrong: I wasn't aware of such note, that I was thinking maybe > > > something is broken. > > > > > > Later I also got quite few same complains. It may also took them a while > > > to know what's happened. > > > > > > Anyway, my point is, for this kind of change, we should have added the > > > alias support firstly. > > > > Yes. > > > > > If that's been done, then the announcement is not > > > needed at all? > > > > The announcement would be needed to remove the aliases, later. > > Why do you have to remove an aliase? What's wrong if they stay there > forever. I think the naming will be switched (maybe slowly) when we > haved updated the doc (whereas it states "net_vhost" but not "eth_vhost" > only). > > After few releases, the name should have been switched fluently. And > we should not care about those alias. Yes I was just thinking removing dead code later. And it's generally simpler to end with only one way of doing things.