Re: [dpdk-dev] Stable ABI status of rte_meter_[t|s]rtcm_profile_config

[Kevin Traynor]

On 08/01/2018 03:30 PM, Dumitrescu, Cristian wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kevin Traynor [mailto:ktray...@redhat.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 1, 2018 11:48 AM
>> To: dev@dpdk.org; Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitre...@intel.com>
>> Cc: Andy Green <a...@warmcat.com>; Singh, Jasvinder
>> <jasvinder.si...@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Stable ABI status of
>> rte_meter_[t|s]rtcm_profile_config
>>
>> On 05/28/2018 04:31 AM, Andy Green wrote:
>>> Hi -
>>>
>>> Between 18.02 and the putative 18.05 there were changes in the way the
>>> meter stuff deals with its config.
>>>
>>> I updated the related code in lagopus, but I get warnings about using
>>> the new APIs (it's the same for rte_meter_trtcm_profile_config())
>>>
>>> ./dpdk/meter.c: In function 'dpdk_register_meter':
>>> ./dpdk/meter.c:119:7: warning: 'rte_meter_srtcm_profile_config' is
>>> deprecated: Symbol is not yet part of stable ABI
>>> [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
>>>        rte_meter_srtcm_profile_config(&lband->sp, &param);
>>>        ^
>>> In file included from ./dpdk/meter.c:27:0:
>>> /home/agreen/lagopus/src/dpdk/build/include/rte_meter.h:86:1: note:
>>> declared here
>>>  rte_meter_srtcm_profile_config(struct rte_meter_srtcm_profile *p,
>>>  ^
>>> ./dpdk/meter.c:132:7: warning: 'rte_meter_srtcm_profile_config' is
>>> deprecated: Symbol is not yet part of stable ABI
>>> [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
>>>        rte_meter_srtcm_profile_config(&lband->sp, &param);
>>>        ^
>>> In file included from ./dpdk/meter.c:27:0:
>>> /home/agreen/lagopus/src/dpdk/build/include/rte_meter.h:86:1: note:
>>> declared here
>>>  rte_meter_srtcm_profile_config(struct rte_meter_srtcm_profile *p,
>>>
>>
>> Hi Cristian,
>>
>> Are these API still to be considered experimental in 18.08, or the tags
>> can be removed?
>>
>> Kevin.
> 
> No, we should remove the experimental tag on these functions.
> 

ok, I just did a quick compile tested patch. Will send.

>>
>>>
>>> As far as I can see this api change is not optional, it changes the
>>> parameters for related apis to require a struct prepared with these new
>>> apis.
>>>
>>> -Andy
>