From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE6D423AC; Wed, 11 Jan 2023 10:03:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E79D40691; Wed, 11 Jan 2023 10:03:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 864794014F for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2023 10:03:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED9245C01AF; Wed, 11 Jan 2023 04:03:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Jan 2023 04:03:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1673427807; x= 1673514207; bh=xGXu7Qcs0mX/uuqNj95g8OZLY/LtESks6tkXCkSyZmw=; b=o sMdLUaWH7qWzVEazC/cbSNCCenMAbO5cjKSCQTfOBfsnOlAS1DNcuMvn8rO7bdRw sRuaDtfnq7GeGwQhi1uO/wR3gOaO7JTAOdkStF72H1DTWFADYQl4h/N/s7fPxcD4 LbF3x/8qCYH8FvXp2C9pifHmnAlrInzB/pcroUy9PBlq8Rd51T636m18kISr6/dk rtR2UTozA4PfMGWOfTWnatUfHXCGaPpr1A+Q4uMLYP6EbD+LmnZWs1aM2LmxIMQ/ rpAkwTtMY6bFgbZaaTXKjYM4/fUROB7nuZ5SPSWPBdxJHo7TtvyQpMYEoObqH/3w ejBKn1oE0d4xfae1frtow== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1673427807; x= 1673514207; bh=xGXu7Qcs0mX/uuqNj95g8OZLY/LtESks6tkXCkSyZmw=; b=d NL/x1FOmsrY50Am8KOtiNSv1BCnAP518/lt7WS1dAzx4+3IVdoHhKS3bJWDXGFK7 jgWgkZug6ygnkiXSV+NXtQ8EGthx7ivTxeiaERFeNU5/elTSsJNhv1NmtMcNu/yz xqxoMOOMPWxYttLwNjNEznzczDp+wPTfyhZP1DNZjzyt8AZwsnGZDCyVhE5F1+8X AOFZIziMpZOrLyrfDm7D4MuaXEVi8k/VVa0Q8fyRrO5NimoNGv2Lvm/t2WiPqMY4 LBfVDObVJBIuHEGjJdFPZOJIyL3q0nPFEcDRrDH2AMnelYx2zbgPM1bkiemwgiBq ol7kn+e0G44MAlYTHe9ww== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrleefgdduvdejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 11 Jan 2023 04:03:26 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Kai Ji , "pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com" , Akhil Goyal Cc: Tyler Retzlaff , dev@dpdk.org, "dev@dpdk.org" , David Marchand Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH] crypto/qat: fix build Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2023 10:03:24 +0100 Message-ID: <13467772.uLZWGnKmhe@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20221230210728.86920-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <20221230213800.GA5139@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 04/01/2023 12:56, Akhil Goyal: > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 10:07:28PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > When trying to compile on a fresh system, I hit this error: > > > > > > intel-ipsec-mb.h:333: error: "AES_BLOCK_SIZE" redefined > > > 333 | #define AES_BLOCK_SIZE IMB_AES_BLOCK_SIZE > > > In file included from drivers/crypto/qat/qat_sym_session.c:8: > > > /usr/include/openssl/aes.h:26: previous definition > > > 26 | # define AES_BLOCK_SIZE 16 > > > > > > I don't know why it was not seen before. > > > Is it because of a change in intel-ipsec-mb.h or in OpenSSL? > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > > --- > > > > owners of intel-ipsec-mb.h should guard against the namespace > > conflict... > > > > Acked-by: Tyler Retzlaff > > Applied to dpdk-next-crypto > > Thanks. I'm concerned to have no answer from Pablo and Kai. It is real design problem. Is there any plan to have a protected namespace?