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 E3440A0032; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 10:07:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C17342C00; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 10:06:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE6A42BDE for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 10:06:34 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1666339593; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=MWk0y5dWPD+Qtne+962RCA7xI15U0fB4Svg+Bk+em08=; b=EdL5Lh3GYbC58BCfHSIIGrGPAAQiTVpXkTFj2vMUFV1pEoQb/NoJ2+QGbjHf4bmJHftRgH v7QZzQ1y2KzBD+tZ9acbhbeKVkRNoeqDzCWaShPVK/gpAj6lSA5ow/NrLpGDUijtvf6AN6 i0rk6EisQOaJE0ypKnDyI4YGykdrhXY= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-528-MSKrFNPBNgaB19o0MMaYEA-1; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 04:06:30 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MSKrFNPBNgaB19o0MMaYEA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5892586F131; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:06:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.39.208.30] (unknown [10.39.208.30]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FE092166B33; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:06:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 10:06:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 18/30] baseband/acc100: enable input validation by default To: "Chautru, Nicolas" , "Vargas, Hernan" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "gakhil@marvell.com" , "trix@redhat.com" Cc: "Zhang, Qi Z" References: <20221012025346.204394-1-hernan.vargas@intel.com> <20221012025346.204394-19-hernan.vargas@intel.com> From: Maxime Coquelin In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.6 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Hi Nicolas, On 10/20/22 00:12, Chautru, Nicolas wrote: > Hi Maxime, > >> From: Maxime Coquelin >> On 10/12/22 04:53, Hernan Vargas wrote: >>> Enable validation functions by default and provide a new flag >>> RTE_LIBRTE_SKIP_VALIDATE if the user wants to run without validating >>> input to save cycles. >> >> I would prefer a devarg, so that it can be enabled/disabled at runtime, instead >> of build time. The extra if condition would minimal. > > Could you please review the previous discussion on https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/cover/20221012025346.204394-1-hernan.vargas@intel.com/ > Basically we would keep this build time flag and update documentation for this release. Then for next release consider devarg. > Let us know what you think? > > That's not ideal, but if you commit to do it in the next release this is OK for me. Thanks, Maxime