2021-10-20 00:05 (UTC+0530), Harman Kalra:
> Making changes to the interrupt framework to use interrupt handle
> APIs to get/set any field. Direct access to any of the fields
> should be avoided to avoid any ABI breakage in future.
I get and accept the point why EAL also should use the API.
However, mentioning ABI is still a wrong wording.
There is no ABI between EAL structures and EAL functions by definition of ABI.
>
> Signed-off-by: Harman Kalra <hka...@marvell.com>
> ---
> lib/eal/freebsd/eal_interrupts.c | 92 ++++++----
> lib/eal/linux/eal_interrupts.c | 287 +++++++++++++++++++------------
> 2 files changed, 234 insertions(+), 145 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/eal/freebsd/eal_interrupts.c
> b/lib/eal/freebsd/eal_interrupts.c
[...]
> @@ -135,9 +137,18 @@ rte_intr_callback_register(const struct rte_intr_handle
> *intr_handle,
> ret = -ENOMEM;
> goto fail;
> } else {
> - src->intr_handle = *intr_handle;
> - TAILQ_INIT(&src->callbacks);
> - TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&intr_sources, src, next);
> + src->intr_handle = rte_intr_instance_alloc();
> + if (src->intr_handle == NULL) {
> + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Can not create intr
> instance\n");
> + free(callback);
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
goto fail?
> + } else {
> + rte_intr_instance_copy(src->intr_handle,
> + intr_handle);
> + TAILQ_INIT(&src->callbacks);
> + TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&intr_sources, src,
> + next);
> + }
> }
> }
>
[...]
> @@ -213,7 +226,7 @@ rte_intr_callback_unregister_pending(const struct
> rte_intr_handle *intr_handle,
> struct rte_intr_callback *cb, *next;
>
> /* do parameter checking first */
> - if (intr_handle == NULL || intr_handle->fd < 0) {
> + if (intr_handle == NULL || rte_intr_fd_get(intr_handle) < 0) {
The handle is checked for NULL inside the accessor, here and in other places:
grep -R 'intr_handle == NULL ||' lib/eal
> RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> "Unregistering with invalid input parameter\n");
> return -EINVAL;
> diff --git a/lib/eal/linux/eal_interrupts.c b/lib/eal/linux/eal_interrupts.c
[...]
