Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] doc: add inline protocol in feature list

[Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>]

> On 2/12/2020 1:48 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> > Hi Ferruh,
> >>
> >>
> >> Since both using the rte_security, for a PMD isn't there a way to say if it is
> >> supporting any one of them or both? If so what do you think documenting it
> too?
> >>
> > I think that is mentioned in the rte_security capabilities about the action types
> > Which are supported by the driver. One of the dev->security_ctx->ops is to get
> the security
> > Capabilities which will return the supported action type by the PMD.
> >
> > I am not sure if we can add that here or not. It is your call.
> >
> 
> I think it make sense to document action types needs to be supported to claim
> that the feature is supported, but most probably you will judge better on the
> matter.

If we can add specifics of security in ethernet feature definition,
Then probably we can add 
**[provides]   rte_security_ops, capabilities_get**: `` action: RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO ``

For inline crypto
And
**[provides]   rte_security_ops, capabilities_get**: `` action: RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL`` 

Please check my syntax if it is not correct.