Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] crypto: fix pedantic compilation errors

["De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Nelio Laranjeiro
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 2:16 PM
> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> Cc: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; Doherty, Declan
> <declan.doherty@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Gaetan Rivet
> <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] crypto: fix pedantic compilation
> errors
> 
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 01:54:22PM +0000, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Nelio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 12:43 PM
> > > To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; Doherty, Declan
> > > <declan.doherty@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Gaetan Rivet
> > > <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] crypto: fix pedantic compilation errors
> > >
> > > Hi Pablo,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 11:49:39AM +0000, De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Nelio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2017 10:03 AM
> > > > > To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; Doherty, Declan
> > > > > <declan.doherty@intel.com>
> > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>; De
> Lara
> > > > > Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH v2 2/3] crypto: fix pedantic compilation errors
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > > --- a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_crypto.h
> > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_crypto.h
> > > > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ struct rte_crypto_op {
> > > > >  	rte_iova_t phys_addr;
> > > > >  	/**< physical address of crypto operation */
> > > > >
> > > > > -	RTE_STD_C11
> > > > > +	__extension__
> > > >
> > > > Hi Nelio,
> > > >
> > > > Since RTE_STD_C11 is basically __extension__ when
> __STDC_VERSION__
> > > is
> > > > not defined, Is this forcing __extension__ to be used no matter what?
> > > (even if C11 is not supported).
> > >
> > > Yes
> > >
> >
> > Right, and are we sure that this is OK? If C11 is supported, do we
> > still want extension?
> 
> Having an array with an empty size inside a union does not make part of
> any standard, it is an extension of the language.

If no other objections from the community:

Acked-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>#

> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
> Nélio Laranjeiro
> 6WIND