From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0544A0350; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 20:56:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F6741144; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 20:56:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B999541101 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 20:56:03 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1644350163; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=r3kgR31Y9CqATASI4/pGLK3JmKfyKwuv7hkc6HDYcjY=; b=atRpHv4Rt4W5TTrLyYJx/fNpvnMb9i7pbfyqLqa2ZTX1VxUkPdEefJJ9KdvJlnoDhZ5fyN BSrk5CrsXJloivqt7PZb23M1N37C5Jp5cSEeBP0UbPyCCTQ6PTru7mSAe6kuIANRzEmr3O TScz6QjLR2ZfZj3HklmoP/6a8Jt0mtM= Received: from mail-lj1-f197.google.com (mail-lj1-f197.google.com [209.85.208.197]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-422-7y4hYtAjO_K1I-fYYdJjBg-1; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 14:56:00 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 7y4hYtAjO_K1I-fYYdJjBg-1 Received: by mail-lj1-f197.google.com with SMTP id v1-20020a2e9601000000b002446a7310a1so69055ljh.3 for ; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 11:56:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r3kgR31Y9CqATASI4/pGLK3JmKfyKwuv7hkc6HDYcjY=; b=xe6xXDT9pAYz8V5acHCWfQYQeyhI28MVWTgprkOwLLw6kjacXG/wQA4Ik7ycnm5LiE 96c9M0R456gLy5VHNIjjy+0phaDzQuarSnc/Dx3CVlxP3/6cblsEuh2D6zhqn8ZZCcy8 ht7rdKbGCyE3KSsS3WLMSSNE3uquKwu3r7Oe6SvH9q9s85LI6z6Pw8ioylk9smjWmLjy 6a8qft2xTi24H6IcKqK6b4EKFuLVwKuYGk/tjzrIynTJ/g74wUUYwxb98DuWQS1rcexl vYjbCGZKOWPWD45YqnTdyzm5h05+dNM/hUDMJo1MZ5q+8kvexWEJ3QgAXr1LrlL45qTz Iw5A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532g/1ArlPQ1NOuRajbZ06ViKemVAVsYjXoe9A9m1Qv79MfWEi6k 25zP2GmxmATGB+W9J6k/R8xPFXENcJ6p2Eu8kTEfpFIPsi/tVD/ImYx/u93/o1u8gBQu+qrc+EZ 7TM/TByuog3YgBsm69fE= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:5848:: with SMTP id x8mr3646569ljd.297.1644350159229; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 11:55:59 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy91aYxVxkyqN8tZcIex2vauhee8WIzTwUAKQQ6Yqtvij8V5UariikOnT628CekLby7u48/ZenG5pM6fVtKrfg= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:5848:: with SMTP id x8mr3646550ljd.297.1644350158993; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 11:55:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220130175935.1947730-1-gakhil@marvell.com> <20220204221334.3551574-1-gakhil@marvell.com> <20220204221334.3551574-4-gakhil@marvell.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 20:55:47 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] security: add IPsec option for IP reassembly To: Akhil Goyal , Dodji Seketeli Cc: dev , Anoob Joseph , Matan Azrad , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Thomas Monjalon , "Yigit, Ferruh" , Andrew Rybchenko , Rosen Xu , Olivier Matz , Radu Nicolau , Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , Stephen Hemminger , Ray Kinsella Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 1 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 2:19 PM Akhil Goyal wrote: > > > > I tried this in the first place but abi check was complaining in other structures > > > which included > > > > rte_security_ipsec_sa_options. So I had to add suppression for those as well. > > > > Can you try at your end? > > > > > > I tried before suggesting, and it works with a single rule on this structure. > > > > > > I'm using libabigail current master, which version are you using so I > > > can try with the same? > > > > > I am currently using 1.6 version. I will try with latest version. > > $ abidiff --version > > abidiff: 1.6.0 > > > It seems the latest version 2.0 is not compatible with Ubuntu 20.04. > It is not getting compiled. I am using the HEAD of libabigail master branch, so maybe something got fixed between 2.0 and the current master. > Can you check with 1.6.0 version? I tried 1.6 in GHA (Ubuntu 18.04), and I can reproduce the warnings you reported. But in the end, we use 1.8 in GHA: https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/.github/workflows/build.yml#n23 The simplest rule (on rte_security_ipsec_sa_options only) passes fine with this version of libabigail: https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/runs/5109221298?check_suite_focus=true -- David Marchand