2015-06-16 16:05, Stephen Hemminger:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2015 14:52:16 +0100
> Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:51:11AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > From: Stephen Hemminger <shemming at brocade.com>
> > >
> > > These were deprecated in 2.0 so remove them from 2.1
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen at networkplumber.org>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/net/ring/rte_eth_ring.c | 55
> > > -------------------------------
> > > drivers/net/ring/rte_eth_ring_version.map | 4 +--
> > > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 58 deletions(-)
> > >
> > [..snip..]
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ring/rte_eth_ring_version.map
> > > b/drivers/net/ring/rte_eth_ring_version.map
> > > index 8ad107d..5ee55d9 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/ring/rte_eth_ring_version.map
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ring/rte_eth_ring_version.map
> > > @@ -1,9 +1,7 @@
> > > -DPDK_2.0 {
> > > +DPDK_2.1 {
> > > global:
> > >
> > > rte_eth_from_rings;
> > > - rte_eth_ring_pair_attach;
> > > - rte_eth_ring_pair_create;
> > >
> > > local: *;
> > > };
> >
> > [ABI newbie question] Is this how deprecating a fn is done? We no longer
> > have any DPDK_2.0
> > version listings in the .map file?
>
> Notice the version # changed as well, so linker will generate a new version.
> The function was marked deprecated in last version.
What happens if you load the 2.1 lib with an app built for 2.0?
Shouldn't we keep the DPDK_2.0 block?
