diff mbox series

[v9,4/4] devtools: add exception for reserved fields

Message ID 20210414122036.1262579-5-gakhil@marvell.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: Jerin Jacob
Headers show
Series Enhancements to crypto adapter forward mode | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
ci/iol-testing success Testing PASS
ci/intel-Testing success Testing PASS
ci/Intel-compilation success Compilation OK
ci/checkpatch success coding style OK

Commit Message

Akhil Goyal April 14, 2021, 12:20 p.m. UTC
From: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>

Certain structures are added with reserved fields
to address any future enhancements to retain ABI
compatibility.
However, ABI script will still report error as it
is not aware of reserved fields. Hence, adding a
generic exception for reserved fields.

Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
---
 devtools/libabigail.abignore | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

Comments

Thomas Monjalon April 14, 2021, 12:53 p.m. UTC | #1
14/04/2021 14:20, gakhil@marvell.com:
> From: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
> 
> Certain structures are added with reserved fields
> to address any future enhancements to retain ABI
> compatibility.
> However, ABI script will still report error as it
> is not aware of reserved fields. Hence, adding a
> generic exception for reserved fields.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
> ---
>  devtools/libabigail.abignore | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/devtools/libabigail.abignore b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> index 46a5a6af5..a9d284f76 100644
> --- a/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> +++ b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> @@ -25,3 +25,7 @@
>  [suppress_type]
>  	name = rte_eventdev
>  	has_data_member_inserted_between = {offset_after(attached), end}
> +
> +; Ignore changes in reserved fields
> +[suppress_variable]
> +	name_regexp = reserved

If we do that as first patch of this series,
we don't need the exception on rte_eventdev, right?
Akhil Goyal April 14, 2021, 2:16 p.m. UTC | #2
Hi Thomas,

14/04/2021 14:20, gakhil@marvell.com:
> From: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
>
> Certain structures are added with reserved fields
> to address any future enhancements to retain ABI
> compatibility.
> However, ABI script will still report error as it
> is not aware of reserved fields. Hence, adding a
> generic exception for reserved fields.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
> ---
>  devtools/libabigail.abignore | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/devtools/libabigail.abignore b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> index 46a5a6af5..a9d284f76 100644
> --- a/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> +++ b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> @@ -25,3 +25,7 @@
>  [suppress_type]
>        name = rte_eventdev
>        has_data_member_inserted_between = {offset_after(attached), end}
> +
> +; Ignore changes in reserved fields
> +[suppress_variable]
> +     name_regexp = reserved

If we do that as first patch of this series,
we don't need the exception on rte_eventdev, right?

It will still be required, as we have 2 issues
1. Reserved_ptr[4] to reserved[3]
2. Additional member ca_enqueue added

So we need both.

Regards,
Akhil
Thomas Monjalon April 14, 2021, 2:22 p.m. UTC | #3
14/04/2021 16:16, Akhil Goyal:
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> > 14/04/2021 14:20, gakhil@marvell.com:
> > > From: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
> > > 
> > > Certain structures are added with reserved fields
> > > to address any future enhancements to retain ABI
> > > compatibility.
> > > However, ABI script will still report error as it
> > > is not aware of reserved fields. Hence, adding a
> > > generic exception for reserved fields.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > >  devtools/libabigail.abignore | 4 ++++
> > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/devtools/libabigail.abignore b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> > > index 46a5a6af5..a9d284f76 100644
> > > --- a/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> > > +++ b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> > > @@ -25,3 +25,7 @@
> > > 
> > >  [suppress_type]
> > >  
> > >        name = rte_eventdev
> > >        has_data_member_inserted_between = {offset_after(attached), end}
> > > 
> > > +
> > > +; Ignore changes in reserved fields
> > > +[suppress_variable]
> > > +     name_regexp = reserved
> > 
> > If we do that as first patch of this series,
> > we don't need the exception on rte_eventdev, right?
> 
> It will still be required, as we have 2 issues
> 1. Reserved_ptr[4] to reserved[3]
> 2. Additional member ca_enqueue added
> 
> So we need both.

If this patch is required, it should not be the last one.
Akhil Goyal April 14, 2021, 5:56 p.m. UTC | #4
> > > > diff --git a/devtools/libabigail.abignore b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> > > > index 46a5a6af5..a9d284f76 100644
> > > > --- a/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> > > > +++ b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
> > > > @@ -25,3 +25,7 @@
> > > >
> > > >  [suppress_type]
> > > >
> > > >        name = rte_eventdev
> > > >        has_data_member_inserted_between = {offset_after(attached),
> end}
> > > >
> > > > +
> > > > +; Ignore changes in reserved fields
> > > > +[suppress_variable]
> > > > +     name_regexp = reserved
> > >
> > > If we do that as first patch of this series,
> > > we don't need the exception on rte_eventdev, right?
> >
> > It will still be required, as we have 2 issues
> > 1. Reserved_ptr[4] to reserved[3]
> > 2. Additional member ca_enqueue added
> >
> > So we need both.
> 
> If this patch is required, it should not be the last one.
> 
Ok, I will resend.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/devtools/libabigail.abignore b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
index 46a5a6af5..a9d284f76 100644
--- a/devtools/libabigail.abignore
+++ b/devtools/libabigail.abignore
@@ -25,3 +25,7 @@ 
 [suppress_type]
 	name = rte_eventdev
 	has_data_member_inserted_between = {offset_after(attached), end}
+
+; Ignore changes in reserved fields
+[suppress_variable]
+	name_regexp = reserved