From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16736A0487 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 09:09:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37DB41BF23; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 09:09:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 511B41BF0E for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 09:09:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB7FF21E95; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 03:09:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 30 Jul 2019 03:09:29 -0400 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=mesmtp; bh=o76ByRX05YiFhr6KqlTpTGY8txGMg2QOfdDqsxGlT0s=; b=K8stTVvu283L jSYZqFTHsPaM5tu6/cwi1friKu8OWkWkij3XSHp9HcP8fq7+J63VD/xShke7YmxM GwYzHGdNdtSkv6Cnwkubylztqdo78haX2azi5uRXoGP5JKRnV/Yfzh7JT+E5WGO6 pocdtyoyQp0L4i71XsZLNghJW8pP01k= 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=fm3; bh=o76ByRX05YiFhr6KqlTpTGY8txGMg2QOfdDqsxGlT 0s=; b=ZVaEFtWkMf4H5J1ts0bTOCDVK1u5Knve0ZhvcCCz5ufv6hZJUC7sEmzYy CHCuEL3P2ASHMQKD1A5qKBFYT/zGdfPkSKUICFP0SWD5YoQxlvxjn5yxCEsAS1eE D1XpblSDIXiMPnWVZEFhfBcc3DUEQobhdFOE0WXnQSaURAZ484uIQ6S9ATrutXMX aV62+9KllzX+xnk0wr0JP/jgWZ6MddBj+tOdTNZLY+Dj0I+W8eiUnD0GQF38k6LF PpAJKXTsdYIMhshpZz1mrrzPDTt6B2bkzDQ9hLPDuIh1otfa3fSQSgJ7BHaucR3H QCQnJE2cGpVo0O4jXfKkpWKXjZDDw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrledvgdduudeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedu X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0ED7B380079; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 03:09:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Akhil Goyal Cc: Bernard Iremonger , "dev@dpdk.org" , Anoob Joseph , "konstantin.ananyev@intel.com" , Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , Narayana Prasad Raju Athreya Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 09:09:26 +0200 Message-ID: <17016159.n4PeLHrF3L@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <1562835937-24141-1-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> <3165113.5OK8ffLHOj@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] [PATCH] doc: deprecate legacy code path in ipsec-secgw X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 30/07/2019 07:55, Akhil Goyal: > > > > > > > > All the functionality of the legacy code path in now available in the > > librte_ipsec > > > > > library. It is planned to deprecate the legacy code path in the 19.11 release > > and > > > > > remove the legacy code path in the 20.02 release. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bernard Iremonger > > > > > Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev > > > > > Acked-by: Fan Zhang > > > > > Acked-by: Akhil Goyal > > > > > --- > > > > > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 5 +++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Anoob Joseph > > > > > > Applied to dpdk-next-crypto > > > > Why do we have a deprecation notice for some code path in an example? > > The deprecation notices are for the API. > > > > I think you can drop the legacy code in 19.11, > > and I don't merge this patch in master. > > > > We are planning to remove the original code and replace it with IPSec library APIs which are still experimental. With this change there won't be any example of the legacy ipsec code path. Applications over DPDK take ipsec-secgw as an example and IPSec is a major use case for customers. There may also be performance differences in the two code paths. Atleast on NXP platforms I saw 5-7% drop when the patches were originally submitted. Not sure what is the current state. > I feel it is worth notifying the users that the original codepath is getting deprecated, so that they can plan to move to new IPSec APIs. The deprecation notice is not the right place for a change in an example. What change is there in IPsec API? In which release?