Hi Ferruh, Thomas,

quoted

@@ -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...

<...>