From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier MATZ Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] mempool: add in the RTE_NEXT_ABI for ABI breakages Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 17:31:23 +0100 Message-ID: <56E04FDB.4070100@6wind.com> References: <1455634095-4183-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <1457517037-71693-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <1457517037-71693-5-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <56DFFF06.3080209@redhat.com> <56E00971.8040905@intel.com> <56E03A60.6010807@6wind.com> <56E04F3E.9020503@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Hunt, David" , Panu Matilainen , dev@dpdk.org Return-path: Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FDE0377E for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 17:31:31 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <56E04F3E.9020503@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" Hi David, On 03/09/2016 05:28 PM, Hunt, David wrote: >> Sorry, maybe I wasn't very clear in my previous messages. For me, the >> NEXT_ABI is not the proper solution because, as Panu stated, it makes >> the patch hard to read. My understanding of NEXT_ABI is that it should >> only be used if the changes are small enough. Duplicating the code with >> a big #ifdef NEXT_ABI is not an option to me either. >> >> So that's why the deprecation notice should be used instead. But in this >> case, it means that this patch won't be present in 16.04, but will be >> added in 16.07. >> > Sure, v4 will remove the NEXT_ABI patch , and replace it with just the > ABI break announcement for 16.07. For anyone who what's to try out the > patch, they can always get it from patchwork, but not as part 16.04. I think it's better to have the deprecation notice in a separate mail, outside of the patch series, so Thomas can just apply this one and let the series pending for 16.07. Thanks, Olivier