From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] doc: announce ABI change for
	rte_eth_dev_info structure
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:02:43 +0200
Message-ID: <4440796.rO07sIKd23@xps13>
References: <1460627077-8207-1-git-send-email-reshma.pattan@intel.com>
 <1460627077-8207-2-git-send-email-reshma.pattan@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Reshma Pattan <reshma.pattan@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com (mail-wm0-f43.google.com [74.125.82.43])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CD0A475E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:02:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id u206so24766280wme.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 03:02:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1460627077-8207-2-git-send-email-reshma.pattan@intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-04-14 10:44, Reshma Pattan:
> New fields nb_rx_queues and nb_tx_queues will be added to
> rte_eth_dev_info structure.
> Changes to API rte_eth_dev_info_get() will be done to update
> these new fields to rte_eth_dev_info object.
> 
> Signed-off-by:reshma Pattan<reshma.pattan@intel.com>

In general the Signed-off lines are the same as the From: field.
Here it would be:
Signed-off-by: Reshma Pattan <reshma.pattan@intel.com>
(note the spaces and the uppercase)

> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> @@ -90,3 +90,9 @@ Deprecation Notices
>    a handle, like the way kernel exposes an fd to user for locating a
>    specific file, and to keep all major structures internally, so that
>    we are likely to be free from ABI violations in future.
> +
> +* A librte_ether public structure ``rte_eth_dev_info`` will be changed in 16.07.
> +  The proposed change will add new parameters ``nb_rx_queues``, ``nb_tx_queues``
> +  to the structure. These are the number of queues configured by software.
> +  Modification to definition of ``rte_eth_dev_info_get()`` will be done
> +  to update new parameters to ``rte_eth_dev_info`` object.

It is too late for this announce as it won't appear in the doc downloaded for
version 16.04. So it is obviously rejected.
The question here is: are you allowed to do a small ABI change given that
the ABI will be broken in this version?
I would say there can be some exceptional tolerance.
I have no strong opinion myself but maybe others will have one.

By the way, I have some comments about the patch.