[dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API

[dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API

[Akhil Goyal]

call to dpaa2_sec_dev_configure() is made mandatory,
but dpaa2_sec_pmd returns a ENOTSUP which results in
device not getting configured.

dpaa2_sec PMD does not need any further configuration
to be done in dpaa2_sec_dev_configure, hence returning 0

Fixes: e5cbdfc53765 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: add basic operations")

Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
---
This patch is for stable 17.05 tree only.
This fix is already present in dpdk mainline

 drivers/crypto/dpaa2_sec/dpaa2_sec_dpseci.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/crypto/dpaa2_sec/dpaa2_sec_dpseci.c b/drivers/crypto/dpaa2_sec/dpaa2_sec_dpseci.c
index 4e01fe8..08fd085 100644
--- a/drivers/crypto/dpaa2_sec/dpaa2_sec_dpseci.c
+++ b/drivers/crypto/dpaa2_sec/dpaa2_sec_dpseci.c
@@ -1263,7 +1263,7 @@ dpaa2_sec_dev_configure(struct rte_cryptodev *dev __rte_unused,
 {
 	PMD_INIT_FUNC_TRACE();
 
-	return -ENOTSUP;
+	return 0;
 }
 
 static int
-- 
2.9.3

Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API

[De Lara Guarch, Pablo]

Hi Akhil,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:34 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org
> Cc: hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; yliu@fridaylinux.org; Akhil Goyal
> <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> Subject: [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API
> 
> call to dpaa2_sec_dev_configure() is made mandatory, but dpaa2_sec_pmd
> returns a ENOTSUP which results in device not getting configured.
> 
> dpaa2_sec PMD does not need any further configuration to be done in
> dpaa2_sec_dev_configure, hence returning 0
> 
> Fixes: e5cbdfc53765 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: add basic operations")
> 
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>

Looks ok to me, but this is only applicable in the stable branch,
so no need to send it to dev@dpdk.org.

Thanks,
Pablo

Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API

[Yuanhan Liu]

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:26:39AM +0000, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> Hi Akhil,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:34 AM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org
> > Cc: hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> > <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; yliu@fridaylinux.org; Akhil Goyal
> > <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API
> > 
> > call to dpaa2_sec_dev_configure() is made mandatory, but dpaa2_sec_pmd
> > returns a ENOTSUP which results in device not getting configured.
> > 
> > dpaa2_sec PMD does not need any further configuration to be done in
> > dpaa2_sec_dev_configure, hence returning 0
> > 
> > Fixes: e5cbdfc53765 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: add basic operations")
> > 
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> 
> Looks ok to me, but this is only applicable in the stable branch,
> so no need to send it to dev@dpdk.org.

Why? We already have such fix in upstream? Normally, we just pick upstream
commits (but not patches: the emails) to stable release.

	--yliu

Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API

[De Lara Guarch, Pablo]

HI Yuanhan,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yuanhan Liu [mailto:yliu@fridaylinux.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 3:39 PM
> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> Cc: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org;
> hemant.agrawal@nxp.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API
> 
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:26:39AM +0000, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> > Hi Akhil,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:34 AM
> > > To: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org
> > > Cc: hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> > > <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; yliu@fridaylinux.org; Akhil Goyal
> > > <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> > > Subject: [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported
> > > API
> > >
> > > call to dpaa2_sec_dev_configure() is made mandatory, but
> > > dpaa2_sec_pmd returns a ENOTSUP which results in device not getting
> configured.
> > >
> > > dpaa2_sec PMD does not need any further configuration to be done in
> > > dpaa2_sec_dev_configure, hence returning 0
> > >
> > > Fixes: e5cbdfc53765 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: add basic operations")
> > >
> > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> >
> > Looks ok to me, but this is only applicable in the stable branch, so
> > no need to send it to dev@dpdk.org.
> 
> Why? We already have such fix in upstream? Normally, we just pick
> upstream commits (but not patches: the emails) to stable release.

It looks like this fix was included in
13273250eec5 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: support AES-GCM and CTR").
Unfortunately, this patch should have been split into two different patches.
Since this has already been merged, I think our only way to integrate this
In 17.05.1 is by getting it separately.

Pablo

> 
> 	--yliu

Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API

[Hemant Agrawal]

HI Yuanhan,

> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:34 AM
> > > > To: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org
> > > > Cc: hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> > > > <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; yliu@fridaylinux.org; Akhil
> > > > Goyal <akhil.goyal@n[Hemant] axp.com>
> > > > Subject: [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported
> > > > API
> > > >
> > > > call to dpaa2_sec_dev_configure() is made mandatory, but
> > > > dpaa2_sec_pmd returns a ENOTSUP which results in device not
> > > > getting
> > configured.
> > > >
> > > > dpaa2_sec PMD does not need any further configuration to be done
> > > > in dpaa2_sec_dev_configure, hence returning 0
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: e5cbdfc53765 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: add basic operations")
> > > >
> > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> > >
> > > Looks ok to me, but this is only applicable in the stable branch, so
> > > no need to send it to dev@dpdk.org.
> >
> > Why? We already have such fix in upstream? Normally, we just pick
> > upstream commits (but not patches: the emails) to stable release.
> 
> It looks like this fix was included in
> 13273250eec5 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: support AES-GCM and CTR").
> Unfortunately, this patch should have been split into two different patches.
> Since this has already been merged, I think our only way to integrate this In
> 17.05.1 is by getting it separately.

In general, there may be other incidents, where a patch is only applicable for the stable tree. It may not be applicable for upstream tree due to architecture changes or other reasons.
How do you want to handle such patches? 

e.g. in OVS, we can do it by marking the patch header with "[branch-2.6]"

Regards,
Hemant

Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported API

[Yuanhan Liu]

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 05:32:44PM +0000, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH v2] crypto/dpaa2_sec: fix the return of supported
> > > > > API
> > > > >
> > > > > call to dpaa2_sec_dev_configure() is made mandatory, but
> > > > > dpaa2_sec_pmd returns a ENOTSUP which results in device not
> > > > > getting
> > > configured.
> > > > >
> > > > > dpaa2_sec PMD does not need any further configuration to be done
> > > > > in dpaa2_sec_dev_configure, hence returning 0
> > > > >
> > > > > Fixes: e5cbdfc53765 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: add basic operations")
> > > > >
> > > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> > > >
> > > > Looks ok to me, but this is only applicable in the stable branch, so
> > > > no need to send it to dev@dpdk.org.
> > >
> > > Why? We already have such fix in upstream? Normally, we just pick
> > > upstream commits (but not patches: the emails) to stable release.
> > 
> > It looks like this fix was included in
> > 13273250eec5 ("crypto/dpaa2_sec: support AES-GCM and CTR").
> > Unfortunately, this patch should have been split into two different patches.
> > Since this has already been merged, I think our only way to integrate this In
> > 17.05.1 is by getting it separately.
> 
> In general, there may be other incidents, where a patch is only applicable for the stable tree. It may not be applicable for upstream tree due to architecture changes or other reasons.
> How do you want to handle such patches? 
> 
> e.g. in OVS, we can do it by marking the patch header with "[branch-2.6]"


Yes, you are right, it might happen. Then you need cook a standalone
patch and send it to stable ml only. Since I don't usually pick stable
patches directly from stable ML, you probably need add some marks in
the commit log. Something like "this is for stable tree only and add
a bit explanation".

Normally, every time I saw a patch sent only to stable ML I will ask
the same question I have asked in this email. But I could just miss
it. So you are suggested to do above.

For this case, just as Pablo said, the patch should be split in the
beginning, then only the (small) bug fixing patch will be picked to a
specific stable release. And since it already happened, you could just
send it to stable ML only, and better, with me cc-ed.

Thanks.

	--yliu