From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>
To: "Akhil Goyal" <gakhil@marvell.com>,
"Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>,
fengchengwen <fengchengwen@huawei.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
"hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>,
"pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>,
"fiona.trahe@intel.com" <fiona.trahe@intel.com>,
"declan.doherty@intel.com" <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
"matan@nvidia.com" <matan@nvidia.com>,
"g.singh@nxp.com" <g.singh@nxp.com>,
"fanzhang.oss@gmail.com" <fanzhang.oss@gmail.com>,
"jianjay.zhou@huawei.com" <jianjay.zhou@huawei.com>,
"asomalap@amd.com" <asomalap@amd.com>,
"ruifeng.wang@arm.com" <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>,
"konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru" <konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru>,
"radu.nicolau@intel.com" <radu.nicolau@intel.com>,
"ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com" <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>,
Nagadheeraj Rottela <rnagadheeraj@marvell.com>,
"mdr@ashroe.eu" <mdr@ashroe.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] cryptodev: replace LIST_END enumerators with APIs
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 05:00:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <38aafa18-eb58-4b80-a8c9-2d05d0bac963@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CO6PR18MB4484DA9201E6A66186079C00D86F2@CO6PR18MB4484.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
On 9/23/2024 9:41 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> Hi Morten,
>
> Apologies for delayed response.
>> Maybe a combination, returning the lowest end of the two versions of the list,
>> would work...
>>
>> ----------------------------------
>> Common header file (rte_common.h):
>> ----------------------------------
>>
>> /* Add at end of enum list in the header file. */
>> #define RTE_ENUM_LIST_END(name) \
>> _ # name # _ENUM_LIST_END /**< @internal */
>>
>> /* Add somewhere in header file, preferably after the enum list. */
>> #define rte_declare_enum_list_end(name) \
>> /** @internal */ \
>> int _# name # _enum_list_end(void); \
>> \
>> static int name # _enum_list_end(void) \
>> { \
>> static int cached = 0; \
>> \
>> if (likely(cached != 0)) \
>> return cached; \
>> \
>> return cached = RTE_MIN( \
>> RTE_ENUM_LIST_END(name), \
>> _ # name # _enum_list_end()); \
>> } \
>> \
>> int _# name # _enum_list_end(void)
>>
>> /* Add in the library/driver implementation. */
>> #define rte_define_enum_list_end(name) \
>> int _# name # _enum_list_end(void) \
>> { \
>> return RTE_ENUM_LIST_END(name); \
>> } \
>> \
>> int _# name # _enum_list_end(void)
>>
>> --------------------
>> Library header file:
>> --------------------
>>
>> enum rte_crypto_asym_op_type {
>> RTE_CRYPTO_ASYM_OP_VERIFY,
>> /**< Signature Verification operation */
>> RTE_ENUM_LIST_END(rte_crypto_asym_op)
>
> Will the ABI check be ok for adding anything in between
> RTE_CRYPTO_ASYM_OP_VERIFY and RTE_ENUM_LIST_END(rte_crypto_asym_op)?
> Don’t we need to add exception for that if we somehow make it internal by adding a comment only?
> Library is actually not restricting the application to not use RTE_ENUM_LIST_END(rte_crypto_asym_op) directly.
>
> Also we may need to expose the .c file internal function as experimental in version.map
>
>> }
>>
>> rte_declare_enum_list_end(rte_crypto_asym_op);
>>
>> ---------------
>> Library C file:
>> ---------------
>>
>> rte_define_enum_list_end(rte_crypto_asym_op);
>
> If we want to make it a generic thing in rte_common.h
> Will the below change be ok?
> ----------------------------------
> Common header file (rte_common.h):
> ----------------------------------
> #define rte_define_enum_list_end(name, last_value) \
> static inline int name ## _enum_list_end(void) \
> { \
> return last_value + 1; \
> }
>
> ----------------
> Lib header file
> ----------------
> //After the enum definition define the list end as below
> rte_define_enum_list_end(rte_crypto_asym_op, RTE_CRYPTO_ASYM_OP_VERIFY);
>
I assume Morten suggests his macros to escape from maintenance cost of
updating inline function each time a new enum is added.
But with above suggestion, that cost is still there, so I don't think
this one has a benefit against the original suggestion.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-04 4:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-05 10:14 Akhil Goyal
2024-09-05 15:09 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-05 15:26 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2024-09-06 6:32 ` fengchengwen
2024-09-06 7:45 ` [EXTERNAL] " Akhil Goyal
2024-10-04 3:56 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-09-06 7:54 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-23 20:41 ` Akhil Goyal
2024-10-03 7:00 ` Akhil Goyal
2024-10-06 11:10 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-09 11:21 ` Akhil Goyal
2024-10-04 4:00 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2024-10-04 17:26 ` [EXTERNAL] " Akhil Goyal
2024-10-04 3:54 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-10-04 7:04 ` David Marchand
2024-10-04 17:27 ` [EXTERNAL] " Akhil Goyal
2024-10-10 0:49 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-10-10 6:18 ` [EXTERNAL] " Akhil Goyal
2024-10-28 11:15 ` Dodji Seketeli
2024-10-04 9:38 ` Dodji Seketeli
2024-10-04 17:45 ` [EXTERNAL] " Akhil Goyal
2024-10-28 10:55 ` Dodji Seketeli
2024-10-10 0:35 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-10-28 10:12 ` Dodji Seketeli
2024-10-09 11:24 ` [PATCH] cryptodev: remove unnecessary list end Akhil Goyal
2024-10-09 12:52 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-09 20:38 ` Akhil Goyal
2024-10-09 14:06 ` Hemant Agrawal
2024-10-10 0:51 ` Ferruh Yigit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=38aafa18-eb58-4b80-a8c9-2d05d0bac963@amd.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
--cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \
--cc=anoobj@marvell.com \
--cc=asomalap@amd.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fanzhang.oss@gmail.com \
--cc=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
--cc=fiona.trahe@intel.com \
--cc=g.singh@nxp.com \
--cc=gakhil@marvell.com \
--cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
--cc=jianjay.zhou@huawei.com \
--cc=konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru \
--cc=matan@nvidia.com \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=mdr@ashroe.eu \
--cc=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
--cc=radu.nicolau@intel.com \
--cc=rnagadheeraj@marvell.com \
--cc=ruifeng.wang@arm.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).