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

["Chautru, Nicolas" <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>]

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.
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;
> >