On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 10:16 PM David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 9:45 PM David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 8:26 PM Aaron Conole <acon...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> Gage Eads <gage.e...@intel.com> writes: >>> >>> > The functions rte_service_may_be_active(), >>> rte_service_lcore_attr_get(), >>> > and rte_service_attr_reset_all() were introduced nearly a year ago in >>> DPDK >>> > 18.08. They can be considered non-experimental for the 19.08 release. >>> > >>> > rte_service_may_be_active() is used by eventdev and the sw PMD, and >>> this >>> > commit allows them to not need any experimental API. >>> > >>> > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.e...@intel.com> >>> > --- >>> > drivers/event/sw/Makefile | 1 - >>> > drivers/event/sw/meson.build | 1 - >>> > lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_service.h | 15 +++------------ >>> > lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c | 6 +++--- >>> > lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map | 6 +++--- >>> > lib/librte_eventdev/Makefile | 1 - >>> > lib/librte_eventdev/meson.build | 1 - >>> > 7 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) >>> > >>> > diff --git a/drivers/event/sw/Makefile b/drivers/event/sw/Makefile >>> > index 81236a392..c6600e836 100644 >>> > --- a/drivers/event/sw/Makefile >>> > +++ b/drivers/event/sw/Makefile >>> > @@ -7,7 +7,6 @@ include $(RTE_SDK)/mk/rte.vars.mk >>> > LIB = librte_pmd_sw_event.a >>> > >>> > # build flags >>> > -CFLAGS += -DALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API >>> > CFLAGS += -O3 >>> > CFLAGS += $(WERROR_FLAGS) >>> > # for older GCC versions, allow us to initialize an event using >>> > diff --git a/drivers/event/sw/meson.build >>> b/drivers/event/sw/meson.build >>> > index 30d221647..985012219 100644 >>> > --- a/drivers/event/sw/meson.build >>> > +++ b/drivers/event/sw/meson.build >>> > @@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ >>> > # SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause >>> > # Copyright(c) 2017 Intel Corporation >>> > >>> > -allow_experimental_apis = true >>> >>> I don't think you can remove these. There are still some experimental >>> APIs (f.e. the rename for rte_cryptodev_sym_session_get_private_data >>> marked that function as experimental and it will cause build breakage). >>> >>> Maybe I'm mis understanding it? It would be good to get verification >>> from Bruce whether that API should not be marked as experimental (it was >>> just a rename, so not sure...) - maybe that's a follow up for this >>> patch? >>> >>> See: https://travis-ci.com/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/209722145 for an example >>> >>> The odd thing is I only see it on the clang builds - perhaps it's a >>> missing definition for the clang compiler. >>> >> >> Erf, it looks like the __rte_experimental tag is affected by the order in >> the declaration of the symbol. >> >> --- a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h >> +++ b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h >> @@ -1245,7 +1245,7 @@ struct rte_cryptodev_asym_session * >> __rte_experimental >> * - On success return pointer to user data. >> * - On failure returns NULL. >> */ >> -void * __rte_experimental >> +__rte_experimental void * >> rte_cryptodev_sym_session_get_user_data( >> struct rte_cryptodev_sym_session >> *sess); >> >> > https://hastebin.com/micomogoqi.cs > > Does it mean that the "void *" type had been marked as deprecated with the > previous syntax? > Requesting compiler experts assistance :-) > Ok, did a new pass on the tree.. found quite some sites where we have issues (and other discrepancies... I started a new patchset). Looked at gcc documentation [1], and to me the safer approach would be to enforce that __rte_experimental is the first thing of a symbol declaration. Comments? 1: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Attribute-Syntax.html -- David Marchand
