From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Hunt, David" Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/power: add turbo functions to version.map Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:25:34 +0100 Message-ID: <995cb4f2-44e0-9c4e-45ac-b97a2199a0f9@intel.com> References: <1506946848-173847-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <1556159.HUIlaTtd6f@xps> <1eefa9bb-6f61-f5ba-383f-cfe9ae62862c@intel.com> <1917865.rASfWJCVJS@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 077E81B26C for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 18:25:36 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <1917865.rASfWJCVJS@xps> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Thomas, On 2/10/2017 4:39 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 02/10/2017 17:06, Hunt, David: >> On 2/10/2017 3:55 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>> +DPDK_17.11 { >>>> + global: >>>> + >>>> + rte_power_acpi_turbo_status; >>> Is it really the function you want to expose? >>> rte_power_turbo_status seems more generic. >> Not really, it was in there for completeness, but users should be able >> to keep track of the turbo'd cores, so not really needed. >> >>> More comments about what is part of the API: >>> If you do not want to expose ACPI and VM implementations, >>> it should not be part of the rte_* include files. >> I'll address the above comments in the next version. > You did not address the comment about what is rte_*.h. > If you do not want to expose everything, you should move it to > another .h file. > > Files starting with rte_ are included in doxygen API doc. > Only rte_power.h is installed. > The installed include, the doxygen doc and the map file > should all expose the same API consistently. > > I think a cleanup is needed. While I agree a cleanup is needed, this small patch is only intended to fix the priority issue of the shared library builds, which are broken at the moment. The initial patch should have had rte_power_turbo_status, not rte_power_acpi_turbo_status. Rather than moving code around at this stage, I propose having the three exposed functions in the map file (with the correct names). Then, later on, I can do an ABI breakage notification for the next release to rename all the other rte*.h files, as some consumers of DPDK may be using those directly, at which stage we will be down to just exporting the functions in rte_power.h. Does that sound OK with you? Regards, Dave.