On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 12:38:45 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 22/01/2021 23:24, Dmitry Kozlyuk:
> > On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 21:57:15 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > 22/01/2021 21:31, Dmitry Kozlyuk:
> > > > On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:24:21 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > > 20/01/2021 08:23, Dmitry Kozlyuk:
> > > > > > On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 01:05:59 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > > > > This is now the right timeframe to introduce this change
> > > > > > > with the new Python module dependency.
> > > > > > > Unfortunately, the ABI check is returning an issue:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 'const char mlx5_common_pci_pmd_info[62]' was changed
> > > > > > > to 'const char mlx5_common_pci_pmd_info[60]' at
> > > > > > > rte_common_mlx5.pmd.c
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will investigate and fix ASAP.
> > > >
> > > > Now that I think of it: strings like this change every time new PCI IDs
> > > > are
> > > > added to a PMD, but AFAIK adding PCI IDs is not considered an ABI
> > > > breakage,
> > > > is it? One example is 28c9a7d7b48e ("net/mlx5: add ConnectX-6 Lx device
> > > > ID")
> > > > added 2020-07-08, i.e. clearly outside of ABI change window.
> > >
> > > You're right.
> > >
> > > > "xxx_pmd_info" changes are due to JSON formatting (new is more
> > > > canonical),
> > > > which can be worked around easily, if the above is wrong.
> > >
> > > If the new format is better, please keep it.
> > > What we need is an exception for the pmdinfo symbols
> > > in the file devtools/libabigail.abignore.
> > > You can probably use a regex for these symbols.
> >
> > This would allow real breakages to pass ABI check, abidiff doesn't analyze
> > variable content and it's not easy to compare. Maybe later a script can be
> > added that checks lines with RTE_DEVICE_IN in patches. There are at most 32
> > of
> > 5494 relevant commits between 19.11 and 20.11, though.
> >
> > To verify there are no meaningful changes I ensured empty diff between
> > results of the following command for "main" and the branch:
> >
> > find build/drivers -name '*.so' -exec usertools/dpdk-pmdinfo.py
>
> For now we cannot do such check as part of the ABI checker.
> And we cannot merge this patch if the ABI check fails.
> I think the only solution is to allow any change in the pmdinfo variables.
Send v10 with suppression.
Such check, however, *can* be implemented: at ABI check stage we have two
install directories that dpdk-pmdinfo.py can inspect. Then a script can check
that diff contains only additions, i.e. no device support being removed.
