On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 04:22:15PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 18/02/2024 14:07, Morten Brørup: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > > > 15/02/2024 07:21, Tyler Retzlaff: > > > > --- a/lib/eal/include/rte_common.h > > > > +++ b/lib/eal/include/rte_common.h > > > > @@ -582,6 +582,12 @@ static void > > > __attribute__((destructor(RTE_PRIO(prio)), used)) func(void) > > > > /** Marker for 8B alignment in a structure. */ > > > > __extension__ typedef uint64_t RTE_MARKER64[0]; > > > > > > > > +#define __rte_marker(type, name) type name /* __rte_deprecated */ > > > > + > > > > +#else > > > > + > > > > +#define __rte_marker(type, name) > > > > + > > > > #endif > > > > > > > > /*********** Macros for calculating min and max **********/ > > > > diff --git a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h > > > > index 5688683..9e9590b 100644 > > > > --- a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h > > > > +++ b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h > > > > @@ -16,7 +16,10 @@ > > > > * New fields and flags should fit in the "dynamic space". > > > > */ > > > > > > > > +#include <assert.h> > > > > +#include <stdalign.h> > > > > #include <stdint.h> > > > > +#include <stddef.h> > > > > > > > > #include <rte_byteorder.h> > > > > #include <rte_stdatomic.h> > > > > @@ -464,204 +467,240 @@ enum { > > > > * The generic rte_mbuf, containing a packet mbuf. > > > > */ > > > > struct rte_mbuf { > > > > - RTE_MARKER cacheline0; > > > > - > > > > - void *buf_addr; /**< Virtual address of segment > > > > buffer. > > > */ > > > > + __rte_marker(RTE_MARKER, cacheline0); > > > > > > You don't need to keep the first argument. > > > This would be simpler: > > > __rte_marker(cacheline0); > > > You just need to create 2 functions: __rte_marker and __rte_marker64. > > > > > > You should replace all occurrences of RTE_MARKER in DPDK in one patch, > > > and mark RTE_MARKER as deprecated (use #pragma GCC poison) > > > > I like this suggestion. > > However, some applications might use RTE_MARKER in their own structures. > > Wouldn't it be considered API breakage to mark RTE_MARKER as deprecated? > > Yes it is an API breakage. > Do we prefer waiting 24.11 for poisoning this macro?
i only intend to announce deprecation now, actual poisoning given mbuf is involved probably should be no earlier than 24.11 and possibly even longer. though in my experience adaptation never really happens until it is forced. >
