On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 03:48:05PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 11:35:43AM +0530, Devesh Sharma wrote:
>
> > > > struct bnxt_re_uctx_resp {
> > > > - __u32 dev_id;
> > > > - __u32 max_qp;
> > > > + __u32 chip_id0;
> > > > + __u32 chip_id1;
> > >
> > > You changed something called max_qp into chip_id1 ? How is that
> > > backwards compatible???
> > Yes, this is breaking indeed as Leon also commented. replacing with
> > union and ABI range check
> > will be implemented in V2.
>
> I'm not sure how a union will save you - add the new stuff to the end
> is the usual approach.
Why won't union work?
struct bnxt_re_uctx_resp {
union {
__u32 dev_id;
__u32 chip_id0;
}
union {
__u32 max_qp;
__u32 chip_id1;
}
....
AND ABI_VERSION is define, so backward compilation will work too
#ifdef ABI_VERSION < 2
dev_id
#else
chip_id0
#endif
Thanks
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
