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 3CC2FA04FA; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 23:22:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88BE21C243; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 23:22:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 755081C240 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 23:22:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B158C21E6A; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 17:22:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Feb 2020 17:22:19 -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=EQnlpuHYIubm0L/VnrKixr+B+vSZ05b6JmwiRtyzsKc=; b=c/1P3wVJqRE2 8KdnQp78WRz84OpNs56vD1d+dspv99L/RCoAeDklUAY9fY7MpiefWfWdsYyrrqQI W6uJY+fng5+bD2QwAW6xCI6lKoy4hlaDHUIWn/sCe42Xj78CArKE3bqyU2wh6mAK bT1I+aRSEnGyr3/0htG8pJkqn+z10+k= 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=fm2; bh=EQnlpuHYIubm0L/VnrKixr+B+vSZ05b6JmwiRtyzs Kc=; b=SsNkovhyl6itmaEN7dHTWkRFrWN4ifYFR0dfS5KW9cB41pCtWMdHGAry4 RginuvMjHOTdDJUV0oOwcriHhkpLebN7J5FNhMjBKDAbOM1ZDofrgTfu1uB0+NTG ND6AohiC6nB3GgMiTqnWsb2nbb4g+0CQtxO5lJZDLmTmd8HwLlbNH1tSDZO4a3Mf Kp5f0/bZAvRJ6L3mYFO91T1TZRl/cLtkcWqOxOE6qiRiyiT+Kv66IParRYVZTnq6 e+WyrH7NgiSZ+YTyqKsNvOcT+GMrm43KK7n+7NVvQffkC9er+ZWqbjbORwzrD0SL T1L1QONKKjQlwYZ/Xd6RR/U0Zlmlg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrhedugdduheehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght 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 82DB83280062; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 17:22:18 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Kumar, Ravi1" , "Sardar, Shamsher singh" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Akhil Goyal , david.marchand@redhat.com Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 23:22:17 +0100 Message-ID: <45170712.MN2xkq1pzW@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20200122105222.3758-1-ssardar@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] crypto/ccp: sha3 support enabling in ccp 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" 05/02/2020 13:24, Akhil Goyal: > > For series, > > Acked-by: Ravi Kumar > > > > > > > >From: Sardar Shamsher Singh > > > > > >sha3 support enabled in AMD-CCP crypto controller > > > > > >Signed-off-by: Sardar Shamsher Singh > > >--- > Change patch title and description as below > cryptodev: fix missing SHA3 algo strings > > SHA3 support was added earlier but algo strings were > missing. This patch add the missing strings. > > Fixes: 1df800f89518 ("crypto/ccp: support SHA3 family") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Sardar Shamsher Singh > Acked-by: Ravi Kumar > Acked-by: Akhil Goyal > > Applied to dpdk-next-crypto Sorry I must drop this patch because it triggers an ABI warning: [C]'const char* rte_crypto_auth_algorithm_strings[]' was changed at rte_crypto_sym.h:320:1: size of symbol changed from 168 to 232 I don't understand how the size of this array can impact the application, but I prefer to stay on the safe side for now. Please let's discuss this patch in 20.02-rc3 timeframe.