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 89B09A0A03 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:25:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BDC9140FE3; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:25:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B473140FD2; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:25:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13F085C00D1; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 06:25:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 15 Jan 2021 06:25:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm3; bh= zUJaNUKZz6OgyBTm4lG1RL3dynA78bF5XZ3UDPpB06w=; b=eC65c0xBgQcUYYm0 v/GjKecoBFzRma1nX9EAH0MNxvG1V5irVUZCjqy+XV4dptOl/Dzx6MUtSj2DrcOu IHSug3n1eeU4rg21LaB0Jrtz4BbDwzTJILpkjY4riFNYEt/u99TdA/o6plt7aQyS 0qiWYBPVOsZPP7vqiC1lmjJhFWeO9pK5xOfS6c2L85+eAo/UX1nKIPaTSlZls0cT /b8hEpc3xUH0jUNdCcO6Za08ffvj4bXa9okoSNyeV6j7XcUZ0RmLKoobs+h15Mnh RFtIzuENzUmcgxfu8hNdsjBg+tdCVaHBGVF56vSDF4jtk+q9SvYSGeuSHGWtu95f e7QBRg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=zUJaNUKZz6OgyBTm4lG1RL3dynA78bF5XZ3UDPpB0 6w=; b=Vz0fA6u7fozk4IyBY+D3AJcT3EOxCrKbKXUCjmC2kec41+aklptrbPhjY 038BP2zlZ97EyjwuctU56tAyNGytePzyjR+88/ju2WepVRzPf6CNfQ9y+1AwBy+E EwZL3OdcJLL6jXVx1UyURx1lHj+n7fUbWVj3QWS8ug9PRPpwXROYZdNLyk5qCrvf uUjkX9ObQ6m2MCw3tR3FgsU2WoAfMwppA0LcFWto/zQJLY2Vg7YtwF4pn0vRy6fd mDHSn51s8v0l9f0BprAiZbOf7tKlOpWJHFs+6Y/oY25IQ4Y9/3ExfxIeMjDNeisJ 6068mVSOiV6W1w5/eZbxCgpwqDA0g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrtddvgddtgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdejueei iedvffegheenucfkphepjeejrddvtdehrdeguddrfeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpe dtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhn vght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (3.41.205.77.rev.sfr.net [77.205.41.3]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id F3B96108005B; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 06:25:09 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Hemant Agrawal Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:25:07 +0100 Message-ID: <8754871.pTA5GFj9IM@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20201224075133.15020-1-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com> References: <20201224075133.15020-1-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/proc-info: fix security context info X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" 24/12/2020 08:51, Hemant Agrawal: > static void > -show_security_context(uint16_t portid) > +show_security_context(uint16_t portid, uint8_t inline_offload) > { > - void *p_ctx = rte_eth_dev_get_sec_ctx(portid); > + void *p_ctx; > const struct rte_security_capability *s_cap; > > + if (inline_offload) > + p_ctx = rte_eth_dev_get_sec_ctx(portid); > + else > + p_ctx = rte_cryptodev_get_sec_ctx(portid); > + > if (p_ctx == NULL) > return; > > @@ -859,7 +864,7 @@ show_port(void) > } > > #ifdef RTE_LIB_SECURITY > - show_security_context(i); > + show_security_context(i, 1); > #endif > } > } > @@ -1224,7 +1229,7 @@ show_crypto(void) > } > > #ifdef RTE_LIB_SECURITY > - show_security_context(i); > + show_security_context(i, 0); > #endif It seems this new parameter would better be a boolean.