[v4,1/3] doc: clean ABI/API policy guide

Message ID 20190124181019.17168-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com
State Superseded, archived
Delegated to: Thomas Monjalon
Headers show
Series
  • [v4,1/3] doc: clean ABI/API policy guide
Related show

Checks

Context Check Description
ci/Intel-compilation success Compilation OK
ci/checkpatch success coding style OK

Commit Message

Ferruh Yigit Jan. 24, 2019, 6:10 p.m.
The original document written from the point of ABI versioning but later
additions make document confusing, convert document into a ABI/API
policy documentation and organize the document in subsections:
- ABI/API Deprecation
- Experimental APIs
- Library versioning
- ABI versioning

Aim to clarify confusion between deprecation versioned ABI and overall
ABI/API deprecation, also ABI versioning and Library versioning by
organizing the sections.

Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
---
Cc: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Cc: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Cc: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
---
 doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst | 132 +++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)

Comments

Kevin Traynor Jan. 31, 2019, 5:46 p.m. | #1
On 01/24/2019 06:10 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> The original document written from the point of ABI versioning but later
> additions make document confusing, convert document into a ABI/API
> policy documentation and organize the document in subsections:
> - ABI/API Deprecation
> - Experimental APIs
> - Library versioning
> - ABI versioning
> 
> Aim to clarify confusion between deprecation versioned ABI and overall
> ABI/API deprecation, also ABI versioning and Library versioning by
> organizing the sections.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>

For series
Acked-by: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>

Patch

diff --git a/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst b/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst
index 01b36247e..19af56cd2 100644
--- a/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst
@@ -1,33 +1,31 @@ 
 ..  SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
     Copyright 2018 The DPDK contributors
 
-Managing ABI updates
-====================
+DPDK ABI/API policy
+===================
 
 Description
 -----------
 
 This document details some methods for handling ABI management in the DPDK.
-Note this document is not exhaustive, in that C library versioning is flexible
-allowing multiple methods to achieve various goals, but it will provide the user
-with some introductory methods
 
 General Guidelines
 ------------------
 
 #. Whenever possible, ABI should be preserved
-#. Libraries or APIs marked in ``experimental`` state may change without constraint.
+#. ABI/API may be changed with a deprecation process
+#. The modification of symbols can generally be managed with versioning
+#. Libraries or APIs marked in ``experimental`` state may change without constraint
 #. New APIs will be marked as ``experimental`` for at least one release to allow
    any issues found by users of the new API to be fixed quickly
 #. The addition of symbols is generally not problematic
-#. The modification of symbols can generally be managed with versioning
 #. The removal of symbols generally is an ABI break and requires bumping of the
    LIBABIVER macro
 #. Updates to the minimum hardware requirements, which drop support for hardware which
    was previously supported, should be treated as an ABI change.
 
 What is an ABI
---------------
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 An ABI (Application Binary Interface) is the set of runtime interfaces exposed
 by a library. It is similar to an API (Application Programming Interface) but
@@ -39,9 +37,13 @@  Therefore, in the case of dynamic linking, it is critical that an ABI is
 preserved, or (when modified), done in such a way that the application is unable
 to behave improperly or in an unexpected fashion.
 
-The DPDK ABI policy
+
+ABI/API Deprecation
 -------------------
 
+The DPDK ABI policy
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
 ABI versions are set at the time of major release labeling, and the ABI may
 change multiple times, without warning, between the last release label and the
 HEAD label of the git tree.
@@ -99,8 +101,36 @@  readability purposes should be avoided.
    follow the relevant deprecation policy procedures as above: 3 acks and
    announcement at least one release in advance.
 
+Examples of Deprecation Notices
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The following are some examples of ABI deprecation notices which would be
+added to the Release Notes:
+
+* The Macro ``#RTE_FOO`` is deprecated and will be removed with version 2.0,
+  to be replaced with the inline function ``rte_foo()``.
+
+* The function ``rte_mbuf_grok()`` has been updated to include a new parameter
+  in version 2.0. Backwards compatibility will be maintained for this function
+  until the release of version 2.1
+
+* The members of ``struct rte_foo`` have been reorganized in release 2.0 for
+  performance reasons. Existing binary applications will have backwards
+  compatibility in release 2.0, while newly built binaries will need to
+  reference the new structure variant ``struct rte_foo2``. Compatibility will
+  be removed in release 2.2, and all applications will require updating and
+  rebuilding to the new structure at that time, which will be renamed to the
+  original ``struct rte_foo``.
+
+* Significant ABI changes are planned for the ``librte_dostuff`` library. The
+  upcoming release 2.0 will not contain these changes, but release 2.1 will,
+  and no backwards compatibility is planned due to the extensive nature of
+  these changes. Binaries using this library built prior to version 2.1 will
+  require updating and recompilation.
+
+
 Experimental APIs
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+-----------------
 
 APIs marked as ``experimental`` are not considered part of the ABI and may
 change without warning at any time.  Since changes to APIs are most likely
@@ -130,35 +160,38 @@  is not required. Though, an API should remain in experimental state for at least
 one release. Thereafter, normal process of posting patch for review to mailing
 list can be followed.
 
-Examples of Deprecation Notices
--------------------------------
 
-The following are some examples of ABI deprecation notices which would be
-added to the Release Notes:
+Library versioning
+------------------
 
-* The Macro ``#RTE_FOO`` is deprecated and will be removed with version 2.0,
-  to be replaced with the inline function ``rte_foo()``.
+Downstreams might want to provide different DPDK releases at the same time to
+support multiple consumers of DPDK linked against older and newer sonames.
 
-* The function ``rte_mbuf_grok()`` has been updated to include a new parameter
-  in version 2.0. Backwards compatibility will be maintained for this function
-  until the release of version 2.1
+Also due to the interdependencies that DPDK libraries can have applications
+might end up with an executable space in which multiple versions of a library
+are mapped by ld.so.
 
-* The members of ``struct rte_foo`` have been reorganized in release 2.0 for
-  performance reasons. Existing binary applications will have backwards
-  compatibility in release 2.0, while newly built binaries will need to
-  reference the new structure variant ``struct rte_foo2``. Compatibility will
-  be removed in release 2.2, and all applications will require updating and
-  rebuilding to the new structure at that time, which will be renamed to the
-  original ``struct rte_foo``.
+Think of LibA that got an ABI bump and LibB that did not get an ABI bump but is
+depending on LibA.
 
-* Significant ABI changes are planned for the ``librte_dostuff`` library. The
-  upcoming release 2.0 will not contain these changes, but release 2.1 will,
-  and no backwards compatibility is planned due to the extensive nature of
-  these changes. Binaries using this library built prior to version 2.1 will
-  require updating and recompilation.
+.. note::
+
+    Application
+    \-> LibA.old
+    \-> LibB.new -> LibA.new
+
+That is a conflict which can be avoided by setting ``CONFIG_RTE_MAJOR_ABI``.
+If set, the value of ``CONFIG_RTE_MAJOR_ABI`` overwrites all - otherwise per
+library - versions defined in the libraries ``LIBABIVER``.
+An example might be ``CONFIG_RTE_MAJOR_ABI=16.11`` which will make all libraries
+``librte<?>.so.16.11`` instead of ``librte<?>.so.<LIBABIVER>``.
+
+
+ABI versioning
+--------------
 
 Versioning Macros
------------------
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 When a symbol is exported from a library to provide an API, it also provides a
 calling convention (ABI) that is embodied in its name, return type and
@@ -186,36 +219,11 @@  The macros exported are:
   fully qualified function ``p``, so that if a symbol becomes versioned, it
   can still be mapped back to the public symbol name.
 
-Setting a Major ABI version
----------------------------
-
-Downstreams might want to provide different DPDK releases at the same time to
-support multiple consumers of DPDK linked against older and newer sonames.
-
-Also due to the interdependencies that DPDK libraries can have applications
-might end up with an executable space in which multiple versions of a library
-are mapped by ld.so.
-
-Think of LibA that got an ABI bump and LibB that did not get an ABI bump but is
-depending on LibA.
-
-.. note::
-
-    Application
-    \-> LibA.old
-    \-> LibB.new -> LibA.new
-
-That is a conflict which can be avoided by setting ``CONFIG_RTE_MAJOR_ABI``.
-If set, the value of ``CONFIG_RTE_MAJOR_ABI`` overwrites all - otherwise per
-library - versions defined in the libraries ``LIBABIVER``.
-An example might be ``CONFIG_RTE_MAJOR_ABI=16.11`` which will make all libraries
-``librte<?>.so.16.11`` instead of ``librte<?>.so.<LIBABIVER>``.
-
 Examples of ABI Macro use
--------------------------
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
 Updating a public API
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+_____________________
 
 Assume we have a function as follows
 
@@ -425,7 +433,7 @@  and a new DPDK_2.1 version, used by future built applications.
 
 
 Deprecating part of a public API
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+________________________________
 
 Lets assume that you've done the above update, and after a few releases have
 passed you decide you would like to retire the old version of the function.
@@ -483,7 +491,7 @@  possibly incompatible library version:
    +LIBABIVER := 2
 
 Deprecating an entire ABI version
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+_________________________________
 
 While removing a symbol from and ABI may be useful, it is often more practical
 to remove an entire version node at once.  If a version node completely
@@ -532,6 +540,7 @@  Lastly, any VERSION_SYMBOL macros that point to the old version node should be
 removed, taking care to keep, where need old code in place to support newer
 versions of the symbol.
 
+
 Running the ABI Validator
 -------------------------
 
@@ -571,3 +580,4 @@  compile both tags) it will create compatibility reports in the
 follows::
 
   grep -lr Incompatible compat_reports/
+