> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 4:00 PM
> To: Anoob Joseph <ano...@marvell.com>; akhil.go...@nxp.com; Trahe, Fiona
> <fiona.tr...@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>; Richardson,
> Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>;
> nhor...@tuxdriver.com; Mcnamara, John <john.mcnam...@intel.com>; Trahe, Fiona
> <fiona.tr...@intel.com>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
> <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] add ABI checks
>
> 30/01/2020 14:06, Trahe, Fiona:
> > We were unaware the LIST_END change could constitute an ABI breakage, but
> > can see how it affects the array size when picked up.
> > We're exploring options.
> >
> > I agree with Anoob's point that if we don't allow the LIST_END to be
> > modified, then it means no feature can be implemented without ABI
> breakage.
> > Anyone object to removing those LIST_END elements - or have a better
> > suggestion? Would have to be in 20.11 I suppose.
>
> Yes, having max value right after the last value is ridiculous,
> it prevents adding any value.
> In 20.11, we should remove all these *_END and *_MAX from API enums
> and replace them with a separate #define with reasonnable maximums.
>
I think we'd better avoid public structs that have array of _MAX elems in them.
