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 750CB43C5E; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 15:57:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D93F42DE4; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 15:57:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A6540A6D for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 15:57:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1709737030; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qUV2ssG18oXrtvRpPREC5fULFzvR59aIhxEZf3tJkhU=; b=Kb0yCSfIFhedAB7VGUHY4UqXpEl4g9oa64xZP+tsyCBMzgMnWBhcd7LKifz1v0CSzjPcf+ IsHGbw5Nm9mJENEuql32gRbVbPjdY9NZtd4A1mPpEgoxtl8KnfnFjRpYf8HsX4tZ68t4Mf FNXmCYqh2a1YHjKSFHw9fMD29RwrV5I= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-81-A6cKH6WlMcu0p3BvDL7C3A-1; Wed, 06 Mar 2024 09:57:07 -0500 X-MC-Unique: A6cKH6WlMcu0p3BvDL7C3A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 266D180026C; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 14:57:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from RHTPC1VM0NT (dhcp-17-72.bos.redhat.com [10.18.17.72]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BACC840C6CB7; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 14:57:06 +0000 (UTC) From: Aaron Conole To: "Power, Ciara" Cc: "Sivaramakrishnan, VenkatX" , "Akhil Goyal" , "Ji, Kai" , "probb@iol.unh.edu" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" , Thomas Monjalon , David Marchand , Kevin Traynor Subject: Re: reg. https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=31200 - patch result References: Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2024 09:57:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Ciara Power's message of "Wed, 6 Mar 2024 12:20:30 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.2 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 "Power, Ciara" writes: > Hi Aaron, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Aaron Conole >> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 6:37 PM >> To: Power, Ciara >> Cc: Sivaramakrishnan, VenkatX ; Akhi= l >> Goyal ; Ji, Kai ; probb@iol.unh.ed= u; >> dev@dpdk.org >> Subject: Re: reg. https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=3D3= 1200 - >> patch result >>=20 >> "Power, Ciara" writes: >>=20 >> > + Patrick >> > >> > >> > >> > From: Power, Ciara >> > Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 10:05 AM >> > To: Sivaramakrishnan, VenkatX ; >> > Akhil Goyal >> > Cc: Ji, Kai ; Aaron Conole >> > Subject: RE: reg. >> > https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=3D31200 - patch >> > result >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi folks, >> > >> > >> > >> > Had a quick look, I can also see this: >> > >> > crypto/ipsec_mb: IPSec_MB version >=3D 1.4.0 is required, found versio= n >> > 1.2.0 >>=20 >> This version of ipsec_mb is less than 1 year old. Did this pass any oth= er CI >> testing? I would be surprised if it did - I'm not sure any downstream >> environments that would be using it already. > > We have been using 1.4 (and even 1.5 since it was released) for internal = regression testing and development. > Other than that, the library would be tested by Intel-ipsec-mb team direc= tly. > 1.4 has been supported by the ipsec-mb SW PMDs since it was released, but= now we would like to make it the required version, > to remove the various ifdef codepaths in PMD, and use the newer, more per= formant version of the library. While that is a good goal, this patch series would cause build issues on some distributions (which is evident from the CI failures), and that there are new requirements isn't as clearly documented. AFAICT, it also shifts the requirements from either OpenSSL or IPSec-MB to IPSec-MB. Did I understand it correctly? >>=20 >> > I guess the installed PMD .so file isn=E2=80=99t created because they = are not >> > compiled in, due to the minimum version on environment not meeting the >> new requirements. >>=20 >> I don't see any such new requirements anywhere on the crypto tree. The = only >> change I know about was for QAT to try and default to IPSec_MB 1.4, but = it is >> supposed to fall back to OpenSSL if that is unavailable. Did this chang= e? > > This patchset introduces the requirement, it is not yet on the crypto tre= e. > It is a SW PMD change only - currently they require 1.1 ipsec-mb, but we = want to bump that to 1.4. > QAT dependencies are unchanged. In that case I think there needs to be some additional communications / announcements since it is changing a dependency. > Thanks, > Ciara