Re: [PATCH v2] devtools/cocci: update cocci for ethdev namespace

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

11/02/2022 09:07, Singh, Aman Deep:
> On 2/10/2022 9:00 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 10/02/2022 14:26, Singh, Aman Deep:
> >> On 2/4/2022 1:17 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>> 04/02/2022 07:13, Singh, Aman Deep:
> >>>> Hi Thomas
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2/3/2022 2:31 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>>>> 23/01/2022 18:20, Aman Singh:
> >>>>>> Added two specific exceptions for ETH_SPEED_10G
> >>>>>> and ETH_SPEED_25G to avoid there name change.
> >>>>>> Added check for ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER and ETH_RSS_RETA
> >>>>> Please could you explain why?
> >>>> These two macro's ETH_SPEED_10G & ETH_SPEED_25G are used by ifpga
> >>>> driver and script should no change these.
> >>>> There are multiple ETH_SPEED_NUM_xxx macro that need to be changed
> >>>> to RTE_ETH_SPEED_NUM_xxx. So added above two as specific exceptions.
> >>> Why doing this exception? What is special with ifpga?
> >> These two macro's are defined in 'ifpga/base/opae_eth_group.h'
> >> we don't intend to change these. Target is ethdev namespace only.
> > So we will miss future use of a deprecated macro
> > because ifpga is redefining it?
> > I think it is a wrong approach.
> > We should not make any exception in the check.
> > Instead we can just ignore the warning for ifpga.
> 
> Actually ifpga is not redefining these two macro's ETH_SPEED_10G & ETH_SPEED_25G,
> they are unique to it. Only there prefix, matches with ethdev macro's
> ETH_SPEED_NUM_xxx, which caused coccinelle script to modify these to
> RTE_ETH_SPEED_10G & RTE_ETH_SPEED_25G. So just avoiding it by this change.

Would it work to restrict the match to ETH_SPEED_NUM?