Hi,

On 06/28/2015 10:36 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

Neil, Olivier,
Your opinions are requested here.
Thanks

2015-06-25 08:31, Zhang, Helin:

quoted

Hi Neil

[...]

quoted

quoted

-279,7 +285,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
  	uint16_t data_len;        /**< Amount of data in segment buffer. */
  	uint32_t pkt_len;         /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segments. */
  	uint16_t vlan_tci;        /**< VLAN Tag Control Identifier (CPU order) */
-	uint16_t reserved;
+	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;  /**< Outer VLAN Tag Control Identifier (CPU
+order) */

Do you think here is a ABI break or not? Just using the reserved 16 bits, which was
intended for the second_vlan_tag. Thanks in advance!
I did not see any "Incompatible" reported by validate_abi.sh.

I don't feel there's any ABI break here. I think an application
should not use the "reserved" fields.


Regards,
Olivier