On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 11:41:34AM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > 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 ? > The most direct way is to add a regular expression search to the script that checks the object files. That would be some tricky grep/awk magic, but it should be possible
Neil > > -- > David Marchand
