From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: make driver names consistent Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 18:46:40 +0200 Message-ID: <7993435.bReMuqSN60@xps13> References: <1472077494-164532-1-git-send-email-pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com> <10195497.iZAVVgVpbs@xps13> <20161018141837.GN16751@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-wm0-f53.google.com (mail-wm0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8EE62C01 for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 18:46:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id c78so4573645wme.0 for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 09:46:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20161018141837.GN16751@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" 2016-10-18 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. > > We can try to make this change more progressive by keeping old names > > as aliases for some time. > > Is there a volunteer to work on vdev names aliases, > > with the target of integrating them in RC2 or RC3?