Re: [PATCH v2] crypto/ipsec_mb: require minimum version 2.0 for IPsec MB

[Wathsala Vithanage <wathsala.vithanage@arm.com>]

On 10/14/26 09:42, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 14/10/2026 14:44, Radu Nicolau:
>> On 14-Oct-26 1:16 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> 14/10/2026 11:37, Radu Nicolau:
>>>> On 13-Oct-26 8:51 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>>>> 24/09/2026 13:18, Akhil Goyal:
>>>>>>> From: Nicolau, Radu <radu.nicolau@intel.com>
>>>>>>>> Increase the minimum required IPsec MB library version to 2.0 As a
>>>>>>>> consequence, clean up the aesni_mb PMD code.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau@intel.com>
>>>>>>> Acked-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
>>>>>> Applied to dpdk-next-crypto
>>>>> As usual with Intel IPsec MB, it triggers a compilation failure on Arm:
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/crypto/ipsec_mb/pmd_aesni_mb.c:24:32:
>>>>> error: 'IMB_CIPHER_SM4_GCM' undeclared
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to drop this commit while pulling next-crypto in main.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find a solution.
>>>>> I'm still advocating to merge the Arm fork.
>>>> Hi Thomas, the root cause of the build failure on Arm is their library
>>>> fork which lags behind, being at 1.5 release which is at this point
>>>> almost 3 years old.
>>>>
>>>> The only solution in this release cycle is to drop this patch and rebase
>>>> the ones adding support for 3.0.
>>>>
>>>> Considering Arm lack of support and contributions for these PMD over the
>>>> last couple of years, the only long term solution I see to avoid PMD
>>>> code littered with ifdefs and supporting very old releases of the
>>>> library is to drop the Arm version altogether.
>>> No.
>>> The only solution is to work with Arm.
>> Indeed that would be the ideal solution.
>>
>> If anyone @Arm is still watching this space, please chip in.
> Adding Arm folks

Hi Thomas,
We are looking into the  build issue and how best to resolve it.
Also, would be happy to start a conversation on how we could work on a 
combined fork.

--wathsala