Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] bbdev: extend range of allocation function

[Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>]

On 6/2/23 16:17, Chautru, Nicolas wrote:
> Hi Maxime,
> I don't think it does since no offset position change for the symbol. Also this only extends the type, so still fine if using uin16_t from application.
> I did not receive an email from CICD related to ABI change when pushing this (unlike the other serie for the MLD/FFT changes pushed earlier this week).
> Still let me know if you would like this added as well into deprecation notice, but it doesn't look required.

If ABI checks are OK, then this is good to me.

Thanks,
Maxime

> Thanks
> Nic
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Friday, June 2, 2023 12:56 AM
>> To: Chautru, Nicolas <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; Vargas, Hernan <hernan.vargas@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] bbdev: extend range of allocation function
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/2/23 04:04, Nicolas Chautru wrote:
>>> Realigning the argument to unsigned int to align with number support
>>> by underlying rte_mempool_get_bulk function.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>    lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev_op.h | 6 +++---
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev_op.h b/lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev_op.h index
>>> 96a390cd9b..9353fd588b 100644
>>> --- a/lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev_op.h
>>> +++ b/lib/bbdev/rte_bbdev_op.h
>>> @@ -982,7 +982,7 @@ rte_bbdev_op_pool_create(const char *name,
>> enum rte_bbdev_op_type type,
>>>     */
>>>    static inline int
>>>    rte_bbdev_enc_op_alloc_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mempool,
>>> -		struct rte_bbdev_enc_op **ops, uint16_t num_ops)
>>> +		struct rte_bbdev_enc_op **ops, unsigned int num_ops)
>>>    {
>>>    	struct rte_bbdev_op_pool_private *priv;
>>>
>>> @@ -1013,7 +1013,7 @@ rte_bbdev_enc_op_alloc_bulk(struct
>> rte_mempool *mempool,
>>>     */
>>>    static inline int
>>>    rte_bbdev_dec_op_alloc_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mempool,
>>> -		struct rte_bbdev_dec_op **ops, uint16_t num_ops)
>>> +		struct rte_bbdev_dec_op **ops, unsigned int num_ops)
>>>    {
>>>    	struct rte_bbdev_op_pool_private *priv;
>>
>> Isn't it breaking the ABI?
>>
>>> @@ -1045,7 +1045,7 @@ rte_bbdev_dec_op_alloc_bulk(struct
>> rte_mempool *mempool,
>>>    __rte_experimental
>>>    static inline int
>>>    rte_bbdev_fft_op_alloc_bulk(struct rte_mempool *mempool,
>>> -		struct rte_bbdev_fft_op **ops, uint16_t num_ops)
>>> +		struct rte_bbdev_fft_op **ops, unsigned int num_ops)
>>>    {
>>>    	struct rte_bbdev_op_pool_private *priv;
>>>
>