Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] [PATCH] doc: deprecate legacy code path in ipsec-secgw

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

30/07/2019 07:55, Akhil Goyal:
> 
> > 
> > > > > All the functionality of the legacy code path in now available in the
> > librte_ipsec
> > > > > library. It is planned to deprecate the legacy code path in the 19.11 release
> > and
> > > > > remove the legacy code path in the 20.02 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
> > > > > Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > > > > Acked-by: Fan Zhang <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>
> > > > > Acked-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 5 +++++
> > > > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > Acked-by: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>
> > >
> > > Applied to dpdk-next-crypto
> > 
> > Why do we have a deprecation notice for some code path in an example?
> > The deprecation notices are for the API.
> > 
> > I think you can drop the legacy code in 19.11,
> > and I don't merge this patch in master.
> > 
> 
> We are planning to remove the original code and replace it with IPSec library APIs which are still experimental. With this change there won't be any example of the legacy ipsec code path. Applications over DPDK take ipsec-secgw as an example and IPSec is a major use case for customers. There may also be performance differences in the two code paths. Atleast on NXP platforms I saw 5-7% drop when the patches were originally submitted. Not sure what is the current state.
> I feel it is worth notifying the users that the original codepath is getting deprecated, so that they can plan to move to new IPSec APIs.

The deprecation notice is not the right place for a change in an example.
What change is there in IPsec API? In which release?