Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 17/19] crypto/ccp: support cpu based md5 and sha2 family authentication algo

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

Hi,

I am doing some late comments because I have a quick look when trying
to pull next-crypto in master branch.
Unfortunately, it doesn't met the basic quality criterias.


19/03/2018 13:23, Ravi Kumar:
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Kumar <Ravi1.kumar@amd.com>
> ---
>  config/common_base                   |   1 +
>  drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp_crypto.c      | 282 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp_crypto.h      |   5 +-
>  drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp_pmd_ops.c     |  23 +++
>  drivers/crypto/ccp/ccp_pmd_private.h |  10 ++
>  5 files changed, 316 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
[...]
> +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_CCP_CPU_AUTH=n

Why introducing a compile-time option?
Can it be a run-time option of the device?
We must not add compile-time device option if not well justified.

Talking about justification, there is 0 explanation in the commit messages.
But there are some in next-crypto tree. Where do they come from?