08/01/2021 11:43, Ferruh Yigit: > On 1/8/2021 10:23 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 08/01/2021 10:22, Ferruh Yigit: > >> On 1/7/2021 1:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>> 07/01/2021 13:47, Zhang, Qi Z: > >>>> From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > >>>>> 07/01/2021 10:32, Guo, Jia: > >>>>>> From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > >>>>>>> Sorry, it is a nack. > >>>>>>> BTW, it is probably breaking the ABI because of RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_MAX. > >>>> > >>>> Yes that may break the ABI but fortunately the > >>>> checking-abi-compatibility tool shows negative :) , thanks Ferruh' s > >>>> guide. > >>>> https://github.com/ferruhy/dpdk/actions/runs/468859673 > >>> > >>> That's very strange. An enum value is changed. > >>> Why it is not flagged by libabigail? > >> > >> As long as the enum values not sent to the application and kept within the > >> library, changing their values shouldn't be problem. > > > > But RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_MAX is part of lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > so it is exposed to the application. > > I think it is a case of ABI breakage. > > Yes it is exposed to the application. But in runtime does it exchanged > between > library and application is the issue I think. > For this case it seems it is not, so not an ABI break.
If I create a table of size RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_MAX with DPDK 20.11, I will get an overflow when writing to the new ECPRI index. The question is: can I receive the ECPRI value dynamically from ethdev? If yes, it is an ABI breakage. But I cannot think of such case now.
