hash: promote APIs to stable
Checks
Commit Message
Promote rte_hash_free_key_with_position and rte_hash_rcu_qsbr_add APIs
to stable.
Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Dharmik Thakkar <dharmik.thakkar@arm.com>
---
lib/hash/rte_hash.h | 2 --
lib/hash/version.map | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Comments
On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:38:58 -0500
Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
> --- a/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
> +++ b/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
> @@ -430,7 +430,6 @@ rte_hash_get_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h, const int32_t position,
> * - 0 if freed successfully
> * - -EINVAL if the parameters are invalid.
> */
> -__rte_experimental
> int
> rte_hash_free_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h,
> const int32_t position);
Need to remove @warning EXPERIMENTAL in comment.
What about all the other experimental functions in here?
It looks like all of them should be promoted.
<snip>
>
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:38:58 -0500
> Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>
> > --- a/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
> > +++ b/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
> > @@ -430,7 +430,6 @@ rte_hash_get_key_with_position(const struct
> rte_hash *h, const int32_t position,
> > * - 0 if freed successfully
> > * - -EINVAL if the parameters are invalid.
> > */
> > -__rte_experimental
> > int
> > rte_hash_free_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h,
> > const int32_t position);
>
>
> Need to remove @warning EXPERIMENTAL in comment.
Agreed
>
>
> What about all the other experimental functions in here?
> It looks like all of them should be promoted.
I just changed the symbol that was reported by the tool.
rte_thash_*** were added on 4/19/2021. Vladimir, are you ok with promoting them?
Yipeng, if you are fine, I can promote rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk, rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk_data and rte_hash_max_key_id. These are around more than a year.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 5:19 PM
> To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mdr@ashroe.eu; Wang, Yipeng1
> <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>; Dharmik Thakkar <Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com>;
> nd <nd@arm.com>; Medvedkin, Vladimir <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>;
> nd <nd@arm.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] hash: promote APIs to stable
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:38:58 -0500
> > Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > --- a/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
> > > +++ b/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
> > > @@ -430,7 +430,6 @@ rte_hash_get_key_with_position(const struct
> > rte_hash *h, const int32_t position,
> > > * - 0 if freed successfully
> > > * - -EINVAL if the parameters are invalid.
> > > */
> > > -__rte_experimental
> > > int
> > > rte_hash_free_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h,
> > > const int32_t position);
> >
> >
> > Need to remove @warning EXPERIMENTAL in comment.
> Agreed
>
> >
> >
> > What about all the other experimental functions in here?
> > It looks like all of them should be promoted.
> I just changed the symbol that was reported by the tool.
> rte_thash_*** were added on 4/19/2021. Vladimir, are you ok with
> promoting them?
>
> Yipeng, if you are fine, I can promote rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk,
> rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk_data and rte_hash_max_key_id. These
> are around more than a year.
[Wang, Yipeng]
Thanks Honnappa, please go ahead and have them in your patch. Thanks a lot!
Hi Honnappa,
On 14/10/2021 02:19, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:38:58 -0500
>> Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> --- a/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
>>> +++ b/lib/hash/rte_hash.h
>>> @@ -430,7 +430,6 @@ rte_hash_get_key_with_position(const struct
>> rte_hash *h, const int32_t position,
>>> * - 0 if freed successfully
>>> * - -EINVAL if the parameters are invalid.
>>> */
>>> -__rte_experimental
>>> int
>>> rte_hash_free_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h,
>>> const int32_t position);
>>
>>
>> Need to remove @warning EXPERIMENTAL in comment.
> Agreed
>
>>
>>
>> What about all the other experimental functions in here?
>> It looks like all of them should be promoted.
> I just changed the symbol that was reported by the tool.
> rte_thash_*** were added on 4/19/2021. Vladimir, are you ok with promoting them?
>
I think it is too early to make this API stable.
> Yipeng, if you are fine, I can promote rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk, rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk_data and rte_hash_max_key_id. These are around more than a year.
>
@@ -430,7 +430,6 @@ rte_hash_get_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h, const int32_t position,
* - 0 if freed successfully
* - -EINVAL if the parameters are invalid.
*/
-__rte_experimental
int
rte_hash_free_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h,
const int32_t position);
@@ -691,7 +690,6 @@ rte_hash_iterate(const struct rte_hash *h, const void **key, void **data, uint32
* - EEXIST - already added QSBR
* - ENOMEM - memory allocation failure
*/
-__rte_experimental
int rte_hash_rcu_qsbr_add(struct rte_hash *h, struct rte_hash_rcu_config *cfg);
#ifdef __cplusplus
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ DPDK_22 {
rte_hash_del_key_with_hash;
rte_hash_find_existing;
rte_hash_free;
+ rte_hash_free_key_with_position;
rte_hash_get_key_with_position;
rte_hash_hash;
rte_hash_iterate;
@@ -23,6 +24,7 @@ DPDK_22 {
rte_hash_lookup_data;
rte_hash_lookup_with_hash;
rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_data;
+ rte_hash_rcu_qsbr_add;
rte_hash_reset;
rte_hash_set_cmp_func;
@@ -32,11 +34,9 @@ DPDK_22 {
EXPERIMENTAL {
global:
- rte_hash_free_key_with_position;
rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk;
rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk_data;
rte_hash_max_key_id;
- rte_hash_rcu_qsbr_add;
rte_thash_add_helper;
rte_thash_adjust_tuple;
rte_thash_find_existing;