1 .. SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
2 Copyright 2019 The DPDK contributors
10 This document details the management policy that ensures the long-term stability
11 of the DPDK ABI and API.
16 #. Major ABI versions are declared no more frequently than yearly. Compatibility
17 with the major ABI version is mandatory in subsequent releases until a
18 :ref:`new major ABI version <new_abi_version>` is declared.
19 #. Major ABI versions are usually but not always declared aligned with a
20 :ref:`LTS release <stable_lts_releases>`.
21 #. The ABI version is managed at a project level in DPDK, and is reflected in
22 all non-experimental :ref:`library's soname <what_is_soname>`.
23 #. The ABI should be preserved and not changed lightly. ABI changes must follow
24 the outlined :ref:`deprecation process <abi_changes>`.
25 #. The addition of symbols is generally not problematic. The modification of
26 symbols is managed with :ref:`ABI Versioning <abi_versioning>`.
27 #. The removal of symbols is considered an :ref:`ABI breakage <abi_breakages>`,
28 once approved these will form part of the next ABI version.
29 #. Libraries or APIs marked as :ref:`experimental <experimental_apis>`
30 may be changed or removed without prior notice,
31 as they are not considered part of an ABI version.
32 The :ref:`experimental <experimental_apis>` status of an API
33 is not an indefinite state.
34 #. Updates to the :ref:`minimum hardware requirements <hw_rqmts>`, which drop
35 support for hardware which was previously supported, should be treated as an
40 Please note that this policy does not currently apply to the
41 :doc:`Windows build <../windows_gsg/intro>`.
46 An ABI (Application Binary Interface) is the set of runtime interfaces exposed
47 by a library. It is similar to an API (Application Programming Interface) but
48 is the result of compilation. It is also effectively cloned when applications
49 link to dynamic libraries. That is to say when an application is compiled to
50 link against dynamic libraries, it is assumed that the ABI remains constant
51 between the time the application is compiled/linked, and the time that it runs.
52 Therefore, in the case of dynamic linking, it is critical that an ABI is
53 preserved, or (when modified), done in such a way that the application is unable
54 to behave improperly or in an unexpected fashion.
56 .. _figure_what_is_an_abi:
58 .. figure:: img/what_is_an_abi.*
60 Illustration of DPDK API and ABI.
63 What is an ABI version?
64 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
66 An ABI version is an instance of a library's ABI at a specific release. Certain
67 releases are considered to be milestone releases, the yearly LTS release for
68 example. The ABI of a milestone release may be declared as a 'major ABI
69 version', where this ABI version is then supported for some number of subsequent
70 releases and is annotated in the library's :ref:`soname<what_is_soname>`.
72 ABI version support in subsequent releases facilitates application upgrades, by
73 enabling applications built against the milestone release to upgrade to
74 subsequent releases of a library without a rebuild.
76 More details on major ABI version can be found in the :ref:`ABI versioning
77 <major_abi_versions>` guide.
82 A new major ABI version is declared no more frequently than yearly, with
83 declarations usually aligning with a LTS release, e.g. ABI 21 for DPDK 20.11.
84 Compatibility with the major ABI version is then mandatory in subsequent
85 releases until the next major ABI version is declared, e.g. ABI 22 for DPDK
88 At the declaration of a major ABI version, major version numbers encoded in
89 libraries' sonames are bumped to indicate the new version, with the minor
90 version reset to ``0``. An example would be ``librte_eal.so.21.3`` would become
91 ``librte_eal.so.22.0``.
93 The ABI may then change multiple times, without warning, between the last major
94 ABI version increment and the HEAD label of the git tree, with the condition
95 that ABI compatibility with the major ABI version is preserved and therefore
96 sonames do not change.
98 Minor versions are incremented to indicate the release of a new ABI compatible
99 DPDK release, typically the DPDK quarterly releases. An example of this, might
100 be that ``librte_eal.so.21.1`` would indicate the first ABI compatible DPDK
101 release, following the declaration of the new major ABI version ``21``.
103 An ABI version is supported in all new releases until the next major ABI version
104 is declared. When changing the major ABI version, the release notes will detail
107 .. _figure_abi_stability_policy:
109 .. figure:: img/abi_stability_policy.*
111 Mapping of new ABI versions and ABI version compatibility to DPDK
119 The ABI may still change after the declaration of a major ABI version, that is
120 new APIs may be still added or existing APIs may be modified.
124 Note that, this policy details the method by which the ABI may be changed,
125 with due regard to preserving compatibility and observing deprecation
126 notices. This process however should not be undertaken lightly, as a general
127 rule ABI stability is extremely important for downstream consumers of DPDK.
128 The API should only be changed for significant reasons, such as performance
129 enhancements. API breakages due to changes such as reorganizing public
130 structure fields for aesthetic or readability purposes should be avoided.
132 The requirements for changing the ABI are:
134 #. At least 3 acknowledgments of the need to do so must be made on the
135 dpdk.org mailing list.
137 - The acknowledgment of the maintainer of the component is mandatory, or if
138 no maintainer is available for the component, the tree/sub-tree maintainer
139 for that component must acknowledge the ABI change instead.
141 - The acknowledgment of three members of the technical board, as delegates
142 of the `technical board <https://core.dpdk.org/techboard/>`_ acknowledging
143 the need for the ABI change, is also mandatory.
145 - It is also recommended that acknowledgments from different "areas of
146 interest" be sought for each deprecation, for example: from NIC vendors,
147 CPU vendors, end-users, etc.
149 #. Backward compatibility with the major ABI version must be maintained through
150 :ref:`abi_versioning`, with :ref:`forward-only <forward-only>` compatibility
151 offered for any ABI changes that are indicated to be part of the next ABI
154 - In situations where backward compatibility is not possible, read the
155 section on :ref:`abi_breakages`.
157 - No backward or forward compatibility is offered for API changes marked as
158 ``experimental``, as described in the section on :ref:`Experimental APIs
159 and Libraries <experimental_apis>`.
161 - In situations in which an ``experimental`` symbol has been stable for some
162 time. When promoting the symbol to become part of the next ABI version, the
163 maintainer may choose to provide an alias to the ``experimental`` tag, so
164 as not to break consuming applications.
166 #. If a newly proposed API functionally replaces an existing one, when the new
167 API becomes non-experimental, then the old one is marked with
168 ``__rte_deprecated``.
170 - The depreciated API should follow the notification process to be removed,
171 see :ref:`deprecation_notices`.
173 - At the declaration of the next major ABI version, those ABI changes then
174 become a formal part of the new ABI and the requirement to preserve ABI
175 compatibility with the last major ABI version is then dropped.
177 - The responsibility for removing redundant ABI compatibility code rests
178 with the original contributor of the ABI changes, failing that, then with
179 the contributor's company and then finally with the maintainer.
185 Note that forward-only compatibility is offered for those changes made
186 between major ABI versions. As a library's soname can only describe
187 compatibility with the last major ABI version, until the next major ABI
188 version is declared, these changes therefore cannot be resolved as a runtime
189 dependency through the soname. Therefore any application wishing to make use
190 of these ABI changes can only ensure that its runtime dependencies are met
191 through Operating System package versioning.
197 Updates to the minimum hardware requirements, which drop support for hardware
198 which was previously supported, should be treated as an ABI change, and
199 follow the relevant deprecation policy procedures as above: 3 acks, technical
200 board approval and announcement at least one release in advance.
207 For those ABI changes that are too significant to reasonably maintain multiple
208 symbol versions, there is an amended process. In these cases, ABIs may be
209 updated without the requirement of backward compatibility being provided. These
210 changes must follow the same process :ref:`described above <abi_changes>` as non-breaking
211 changes, however with the following additional requirements:
213 #. ABI breaking changes (including an alternative map file) can be included with
214 deprecation notice, in wrapped way by the ``RTE_NEXT_ABI`` option, to provide
215 more details about oncoming changes. ``RTE_NEXT_ABI`` wrapper will be removed
216 at the declaration of the next major ABI version.
218 #. Once approved, and after the deprecation notice has been observed these
219 changes will form part of the next declared major ABI version.
221 Examples of ABI Changes
222 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
224 The following are examples of allowable ABI changes occurring between
225 declarations of major ABI versions.
227 * DPDK 20.11 release defines the function ``rte_foo()`` ; ``rte_foo()``
228 is part of the major ABI version ``21``.
230 * DPDK 21.02 release defines a new function ``rte_foo(uint8_t bar)``.
231 This is not a problem as long as the symbol ``rte_foo@DPDK_21`` is
232 preserved through :ref:`abi_versioning`.
234 - The new function may be marked with the ``__rte_experimental`` tag for a
235 number of releases, as described in the section :ref:`experimental_apis`.
237 - Once ``rte_foo(uint8_t bar)`` becomes non-experimental, ``rte_foo()`` is
238 declared as ``__rte_deprecated`` and an deprecation notice is provided.
240 * DPDK 20.11 is not re-released to include ``rte_foo(uint8_t bar)``, the new
241 version of ``rte_foo`` only exists from DPDK 21.02 onwards as described in the
242 :ref:`note on forward-only compatibility<forward-only>`.
244 * DPDK 21.02 release defines the experimental function ``__rte_experimental
245 rte_baz()``. This function may or may not exist in the DPDK 21.05 release.
247 * An application ``dPacket`` wishes to use ``rte_foo(uint8_t bar)``, before the
248 declaration of the DPDK ``22`` major ABI version. The application can only
249 ensure its runtime dependencies are met by specifying ``DPDK (>= 21.2)`` as
250 an explicit package dependency, as the soname can only indicate the
251 supported major ABI version.
253 * At the release of DPDK 21.11, the function ``rte_foo(uint8_t bar)`` becomes
254 formally part of then new major ABI version DPDK ``22`` and ``rte_foo()`` may be
257 .. _deprecation_notices:
259 Examples of Deprecation Notices
260 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
262 The following are some examples of ABI deprecation notices which would be
263 added to the Release Notes:
265 * The Macro ``#RTE_FOO`` is deprecated and will be removed with ABI version
266 22, to be replaced with the inline function ``rte_foo()``.
268 * The function ``rte_mbuf_grok()`` has been updated to include a new parameter
269 in version 21.2. Backwards compatibility will be maintained for this function
270 until the release of the new DPDK major ABI version 22, in DPDK version
273 * The members of ``struct rte_foo`` have been reorganized in DPDK 21.02 for
274 performance reasons. Existing binary applications will have backwards
275 compatibility in release 21.02, while newly built binaries will need to
276 reference the new structure variant ``struct rte_foo2``. Compatibility will be
277 removed in release 21.11, and all applications will require updating and
278 rebuilding to the new structure at that time, which will be renamed to the
279 original ``struct rte_foo``.
281 * Significant ABI changes are planned for the ``librte_dostuff`` library. The
282 upcoming release 21.02 will not contain these changes, but release 21.11 will,
283 and no backwards compatibility is planned due to the extensive nature of
284 these changes. Binaries using this library built prior to ABI version 22 will
285 require updating and recompilation.
293 A new ABI version may be declared aligned with a given release.
294 The requirement to preserve compatibility with the previous major ABI version
295 is then dropped for the duration of this release cycle.
296 This is commonly known as the *ABI breakage window*,
297 and some amended rules apply during this cycle:
299 * The requirement to preserve compatibility with the previous major ABI
300 version, as described in the section :ref:`abi_changes` does not apply.
301 * Contributors of compatibility preserving code in previous releases,
302 are now required to remove this compatibility code,
303 as described in the section :ref:`abi_changes`.
304 * Symbol versioning references to the old ABI version are updated
305 to reference the new ABI version,
306 as described in the section :ref:`deprecating_entire_abi`.
307 * Contributors of aliases to experimental in previous releases,
308 as described in section :ref:`aliasing_experimental_symbols`,
309 are now required to remove these aliases.
310 * Finally, the *ABI breakage window* is *not* permission to circumvent
311 the other aspects of the procedures to make ABI changes
312 described in :ref:`abi_changes`, that is, 3 ACKs of the requirement
313 to break the ABI and the observance of a deprecation notice
314 are still considered mandatory.
316 .. _experimental_apis:
324 APIs marked as ``experimental`` are not considered part of an ABI version and
325 may be changed or removed without prior notice. Since changes to APIs are most likely
326 immediately after their introduction, as users begin to take advantage of those
327 new APIs and start finding issues with them, new DPDK APIs will be automatically
328 marked as ``experimental`` to allow for a period of stabilization before they
329 become part of a tracked ABI version.
331 Note that marking an API as experimental is a multi step process.
332 To mark an API as experimental, the symbols which are desired to be exported
333 must be placed in an EXPERIMENTAL version block in the corresponding libraries'
335 Secondly, the corresponding prototypes of those exported functions (in the
336 development header files), must be marked with the ``__rte_experimental`` tag
337 (see ``rte_compat.h``).
338 The DPDK build makefiles perform a check to ensure that the map file and the
339 C code reflect the same list of symbols.
340 This check can be circumvented by defining ``ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API``
341 during compilation in the corresponding library Makefile.
343 In addition to tagging the code with ``__rte_experimental``,
344 the doxygen markup must also contain the EXPERIMENTAL string,
345 and the MAINTAINERS file should note the EXPERIMENTAL libraries.
347 For removing the experimental tag associated with an API, deprecation notice is
348 not required. Though, an API should remain in experimental state for at least
349 one release. Thereafter, the normal process of posting patch for review to
350 mailing list can be followed.
352 After the experimental tag has been formally removed, a tree/sub-tree maintainer
353 may choose to offer an alias to the experimental tag so as not to break
354 applications using the symbol. The alias is then dropped at the declaration of
355 next major ABI version.
360 Libraries marked as ``experimental`` are entirely not considered part of an ABI
362 All functions in such libraries may be changed or removed without prior notice.
367 An API's ``experimental`` status should be reviewed annually,
368 by both the maintainer and/or the original contributor.
369 Ordinarily APIs marked as ``experimental`` will be promoted to the stable ABI
370 once a maintainer has become satisfied that the API is mature
371 and is unlikely to change.
373 In exceptional circumstances, should an API still be classified
374 as ``experimental`` after two years
375 and is without any prospect of becoming part of the stable API.
376 The API will then become a candidate for removal,
377 to avoid the accumulation of abandoned symbols.
379 Should an ABI change, usually due to a direct change to the API's signature,
380 it is reasonable for the review and expiry clocks to reset.
381 The promotion or removal of symbols will typically form part of a conversation
382 between the maintainer and the original contributor.