> -----Original Message----- > From: Kinsella, Ray <m...@ashroe.eu> > Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 8:14 PM > To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] bus/auxiliary: introduce auxiliary bus > > > > On 04/08/2021 13:11, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Kinsella, Ray <m...@ashroe.eu> > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 7:46 PM > >> To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] bus/auxiliary: introduce auxiliary bus > >> > >> > >> > >> On 04/08/2021 12:21, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Kinsella, Ray <m...@ashroe.eu> > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 6:00 PM > >>>> To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > >>>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wang Haiyue <haiyue.w...@intel.com>; > >>>> NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; Neil Horman > >>>> <nhor...@tuxdriver.com> > >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] bus/auxiliary: introduce auxiliary bus > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 25/06/2021 12:47, Xueming Li wrote: > >>>>> Auxiliary bus [1] provides a way to split function into > >>>>> child-devices representing sub-domains of functionality. Each > >>>>> auxiliary device represents a part of its parent functionality. > >>>>> > >>>>> Auxiliary device is identified by unique device name, sysfs path: > >>>>> /sys/bus/auxiliary/devices/<name> > >>>>> > >>>>> Devargs legacy syntax ofauxiliary device: > >>>>> -a auxiliary:<name>[,args...] > >>>>> Devargs generic syntax of auxiliary device: > >>>>> -a > >>>>> bus=auxiliary,name=<name>,,/class=<classs>,,/driver=<driver>,, > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] kernel auxiliary bus document: > >>>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/driver-api/auxiliary_bus.ht > >>>>> ml > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> > >>>>> Cc: Wang Haiyue <haiyue.w...@intel.com> > >>>>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > >>>>> Cc: Kinsella Ray <m...@ashroe.eu> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> MAINTAINERS | 5 + > >>>>> doc/guides/rel_notes/release_21_08.rst | 6 + > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/auxiliary_common.c | 411 > >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/bus/auxiliary/auxiliary_params.c > >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ | > >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ 59 ++++ > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/linux/auxiliary.c | 141 ++++++++ > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/meson.build | 16 + > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/private.h | 74 ++++ > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/rte_bus_auxiliary.h | 201 +++++++++++ > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/version.map | 7 + > >>>>> drivers/bus/meson.build | 1 + > >>>>> 10 files changed, 921 insertions(+) create mode 100644 > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/auxiliary_common.c > >>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/bus/auxiliary/auxiliary_params.c > >>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/bus/auxiliary/linux/auxiliary.c > >>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/bus/auxiliary/meson.build create mode > >>>>> 100644 drivers/bus/auxiliary/private.h create mode 100644 > >>>>> drivers/bus/auxiliary/rte_bus_auxiliary.h > >>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/bus/auxiliary/version.map > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Acked-by: Ray Kinsella <m...@ashroe.eu> > >>> > >>> Thanks, but this patch already integrated :) > >> > >> It appears in the order in which I am going through my email is > >> incorrect. :-) > >> > >>> > >>> Would you like to have a look at another deprecation notice? Andrew > >>> reviewed RFC: > >>> https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-August/216007.html > >>> > >> > >> Its not strictly a depreciation notice though, you are not breaking > >> anything right. > >> Since you are not breaking anything, don't think the notice is required in > >> the 21.11 timeframe. > >> > >> Now if you where doing it in 21.08, it would be an ABI change and that > >> would be a different story. > > > > Thanks for looking at this! > > Yes, it targets to 21.11. The offloading flag is fine, but the shared_group > > does break ABI, detail: > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-July/215575.html > > Right ... its a new field, not a depreciation as such. > What I mean by this is that no existing code is broken. > > 21.11 is a new ABI in any case and you are not depreciating anything, so no > notice is required.
Maybe it a new process, confirmed with Thomas, it's expected: https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/contributing/abi_policy.html#abi-changes
