On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 2:22 PM David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 1:23 PM Neil Horman <nhor...@tuxdriver.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 09:48:22PM +0100, David Marchand wrote: >> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 4:16 PM Neil Horman <nhor...@tuxdriver.com> >> wrote: >> > > If you would like to make this adjustment, I'm fine with it, though be >> > > aware, >> > > you will likely need to make some adjustments to the >> > > check-experimental-syms >> > > script to account for this >> > > >> > >> > I am not sure I see what you mean on check-experimental-syms.sh. >> > I would only do a s/definition/declaration/ in the error message. >> > Do you have something else in mind ? >> All I was saying was that if you wanted to document the policy change, >> you might >> need to check that script as its a reflection of that policy, and I >> couldn't >> recall if it was grepping through .c and .h files (which might imply it >> needs to >> change to reflect this policy). I just looked however, and its checking >> object >> files, so you should be ok. >> > > Yes, thanks for the confirmation. > I have given it some more thought and did not send my patch that removes all __rte_experimental from the definitions sites. The real issue in the end is that the __rte_experimental in headers is the most important thing and can be missed during reviews. But I found no easy way to detect this. Do you have any idea ? -- David Marchand
