03/06/2013 18:08, Antti Kantee : > On 03.06.2013 10:58, Damien Millescamps wrote: > >> -/** Device needs igb_uio kernel module */ > >> -#define RTE_PCI_DRV_NEED_IGB_UIO 0x0001 > >> > >> /** Device driver must be registered several times until failure */ > >> > >> -#define RTE_PCI_DRV_MULTIPLE 0x0002 > >> +#define RTE_PCI_DRV_MULTIPLE 0x0001 > > > > You are breaking a public API here, and I don't see any technical reason > > to do so. The RTE_PCI_DRV_NEED_IGB_UIO flag could be deprecated, but > > there is no way its value could be recycled into an already existing > > flag. > > Is breaking the API a bad thing in this context? IMHO the > initialization APIs need work before they're general enough and > perpetually supporting the current ones seems like an unnecessary > burden. I'm trying to understand the general guidelines of the project. > > (and nittily, recycling flag values is fine for static-only libs as long > as you remove the old macro, but of course removal is the API breakage > you mentioned)
Yes, DPDK is a young project but breaking API should be always justified. In this case it is not mandatory to change it. -- Thomas
