On 8/10/2021 9:03 AM, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: > Hi Singh and Ferruh, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> >> Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 11:31 PM >> To: Singh, Aman Deep <aman.deep.si...@intel.com>; Andrew Rybchenko >> <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>; Xueming(Steven) Li >> <xuemi...@nvidia.com> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; >> NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: change queue release callback >> >> On 8/9/2021 3:39 PM, Singh, Aman Deep wrote: >>> Hi Xueming, >>> >>> On 7/28/2021 1:10 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: >>>> On 7/27/21 6:41 AM, Xueming Li wrote: >>>>> To align with other eth device queue configuration callbacks, change >>>>> RX and TX queue release callback API parameter from queue object to >>>>> device and queue index. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com> >>>> >>>> In fact, there is no strong reasons to do it, but I think it is a >>>> nice cleanup to use (dev + queue index) on control path. >>>> >>>> Hopefully it will not result in any regressions. >>> >>> Combined there are 100+ API's for Rx/Tx queue_release that need to be >>> modified for it. >>> >>> I believe all regression possibilities here will be caught, in >>> compilation phase itself. >>> >> >> Same here, it is a good cleanup but there is no strong reason for it. >> >> Since it is all internal, there is no ABI restriction on the patch, and >> v21.11 will be full ABI break patches, to not cause conflicts with this >> change, what would you think to have it on v22.02? > > This patch is required by shared-rxq feature which ABI broken, target to > 21.11.
Why it is required? > I'll do it carefully, fortunately, the change is straightforward. >
