[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/5] ethdev: increase port_id range
Yang, Zhiyong
zhiyong.yang at intel.com
Tue Sep 26 09:01:57 CEST 2017
Hi Ferruh, Thomas,
> > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ LIB = librte_pmd_af_packet.a
> >
> > EXPORT_MAP := rte_pmd_af_packet_version.map
> >
> > -LIBABIVER := 1
> > +LIBABIVER := 2
>
> I have just recognized this one. This shouldn't be updated. Only LIABIVER of the
> libraries that their API modified should be updated.
>
> The release notes "Shared Library Versions" updates and Makefile LIBABIVER
> updates should be compatible. I mean either both needs to be updated or both
> not updated.
>
Ok. I will cleanup the unnecessary updates.
Here are the list I will update .
- librte_bitratestats.so.1
+ librte_bitratestats.so.2
- librte_ethdev.so.7
+ librte_ethdev.so.8
- librte_pdump.so.1
+ librte_pdump.so.2
- librte_pmd_bond.so.1
+ librte_pmd_bnxt.so.2
+ librte_pmd_bond.so.2
+ librte_pmd_failsafe.so.2
+ librte_pmd_i40e.so.2
+ librte_pmd_ixgbe.so.2
+ librte_pmd_vhost.so.2
Among them, the following libs are added newly.
+ librte_pmd_bnxt.so.2
+ librte_pmd_failsafe.so.2
+ librte_pmd_i40e.so.2
+ librte_pmd_ixgbe.so.2
+ librte_pmd_vhost.so.2
One LIBABIVER need to be fixed.
Could you apply your patch http://www.dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/28738/ in the main tree firstly?
I hope the patchset can be merged into main tree. How do you think about it?
> There is no way to split this patch more without breaking build right?
Yes. it is too hard to split it.
thanks
Zhiyong
> It would be possible to do it if port_t used, but that has been decided not to...
>
> <...>
More information about the dev
mailing list