From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38445A0531; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:38:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49FB1C00E; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:38:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com (new1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.221]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551391BFA8 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:38:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D89625C8E; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 05:38:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 04 Feb 2020 05:38:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=CrOBKoH+VZ05GvR4n7n6lU3h9OmapuDn4tjqZxv5ykc=; b=SQE9miWfihre Za6MsLxupYxBBLy+bnnvKkMq6/8ZrNbARs3e+US8I+l1B1cinaDfLNApF+hh9b9L MrNYtP7LspXRWEeauKni+aTtiJ5I35Xvn8uG6zNf4UMdieteozj/3vvoc/sY5w5C OUs6nVy/ubi8Mj9GwhaXGV4BOxMYhaE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=CrOBKoH+VZ05GvR4n7n6lU3h9OmapuDn4tjqZxv5y kc=; b=wuVLz1IApjCSRcmL1TfdhiEzgNrtjjBFbSkgvyzpwfx5vDr79LV586vxe S/mGKaDVtyc0/1/w5R+8DTStXwxOkm9TqbTzzi0BX9KBzr6xEbUk885VCzz3MzBI TQ4pmI4q5XEBbeDI9iZOBM3BSLjMex5d01oShLjv5CgfzMSyqH3YDLXahO73An+c Ql2cWUf2f7nFlmEdGlRggz/pzkujTMlc9B8nnvuVrbciojefG7vCCOXM4DU6zWoL dqen3YBg1DXD4C1adM3cB94h20daXhqvTXXBQ4eyqNtewHvArQaMSneorCVDmMVs 1p2Ve1grOkl4g61fKCxI4+mjty8Vw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrgeelgddulecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghr rghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0809F3060272; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 05:38:36 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Trahe, Fiona" Cc: David Marchand , Ray Kinsella , dev@dpdk.org, Neil Horman , Luca Boccassi , Kevin Traynor , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Akhil Goyal , "Yigit, Ferruh" , dev , Anoob Joseph , "Kusztal, ArkadiuszX" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Mcnamara, John" , "dodji@seketeli.net" , Andrew Rybchenko , Aaron Conole Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 11:38:36 +0100 Message-ID: <2118950.QkHrqEjB74@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20191220152058.10739-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] add ABI checks X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 04/02/2020 11:10, Trahe, Fiona: > And not used for sizing > > > > > There a c) though right. > > > We could work around the issue by api versioning rte_cryptodev_info_get() and friends. > > > > It has a lot of friends, but it sounds like the right approach. > > Is someone looking into this? > [Fiona] Yes. But not clear yet if can be done by tomorrow. Should be done by today now. > But even if feasible, that only works around the current issue. > There is a bigger issue to be decided here - > Should we be removing LIST_END/MAX values from all enums in 20.11? > Or defining through API comment that they should only be used as a range boundary and > NOT to size an array. And so having a fixed value is not part of the API contract. Please let's discuss 20.11 API later. It is not so urgent.