Thanks for the clarification. Jingjing
> -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 10:51 PM > To: Wu, Jingjing > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; nhorman at tuxdriver.com > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: rename > rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf > > 2015-06-26 07:03, Wu, Jingjing: > > Hi, Neil > > > > About this patch I have an ABI concern about it. > > This patch just renamed a struct rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf to > > rte_eth_mirror_conf, the size and its elements don't change. > > As my understanding, it will not break the ABI. And I also tested it. > > But when I use the script ./scripts/validate-abi.sh to check. > > A low severity problem is reported in symbol "rte_eth_mirror_rule_set" > > - Change: "Base type of 2nd parameter mirror_conf has been changed > > from struct rte_eth_vmdq_mirror_conf to struct rte_eth_mirror_conf." > > - Effect: "Replacement of parameter base type may indicate a change > > in its semantic meaning." > > > > So, I'm not sure whether this patch meet the ABI policy? > > I think it's OK. > > > Additional, about the validate-abi.sh, does it mean we need to fix all > > the problems it reports? Or we can decide case by case. > > Can a Low Severity problem be acceptable? > > We have to decide case by case. > It makes ABI checking impossible to automate. > That's why any help is welcome to check the git HEAD for ABI violation.
