在 2021/4/15 20:45, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
On 4/15/2021 1:36 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
15/04/2021 14:33, Ferruh Yigit:
On 4/15/2021 3:40 AM, Lijun Ou wrote:
Currently, upper-layer application could get queue state only through pointers such as dev->data->tx_queue_state[queue_id], this is not the recommended way to access it. So this patch add get queue state when call rte_eth_rx_queue_info_get and rte_eth_tx_queue_info_get API.
Note: After add queue_state field, the 'struct rte_eth_rxq_info' size remains 128B, and the 'struct rte_eth_txq_info' size remains 64B, so it could be ABI compatible.
Signed-off-by: Chengwen Feng fengchengwen@huawei.com Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou oulijun@huawei.com
Looks good to me, but it is causing an ABI error as we already discussed before as that is false positive.
Ray, David,
Should we add any exception to libabigail.abignore for this?
We do not tolerate any ABI warning. If we are sure the ABI change is false positive, it must be suppressed in libabigail.abignore in the same patch.
A new field is added to public structs, but struct size or the location of the existing fields are not changing (struct is cache aligned).
Can you please support how this can be added to 'libabigail.abignore'?
Lijun can you please send a new version with 'libabigail.abignore' update?
Yes, I can do that. But at the moment I don't know how to update libabigil.abinore. I don't know where to modify Is there any relevant documentation?
Thanks, ferruh _______________________________________________ Linuxarm mailing list -- linuxarm@openeuler.org To unsubscribe send an email to linuxarm-leave@openeuler.org