From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] cryptodev: support security APIs
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 20:52:15 +0530
Message-ID: <9dabdf85-8bd5-26d7-25b2-3503772af2bf@nxp.com>
References: <20171003131413.23846-1-akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
 <20171006181151.4758-1-akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
 <20171006181151.4758-4-akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
 <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CC2F29D@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>, "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com"
 <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, "Nicolau, Radu" <radu.nicolau@intel.com>,
 "borisp@mellanox.com" <borisp@mellanox.com>, "aviadye@mellanox.com"
 <aviadye@mellanox.com>, "thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 "sandeep.malik@nxp.com" <sandeep.malik@nxp.com>,
 "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>, "Mcnamara,
 John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
 <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, "shahafs@mellanox.com"
 <shahafs@mellanox.com>, "olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org"
 <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-sn1nam01on0062.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.32.62])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 425881B2EF
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 17:22:27 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CC2F29D@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi Pablo,
On 10/10/2017 7:13 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
>> Sent: Friday, October 6, 2017 7:12 PM
>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty@intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
>> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; Nicolau,
>> Radu <radu.nicolau@intel.com>; borisp@mellanox.com;
>> aviadye@mellanox.com; thomas@monjalon.net; sandeep.malik@nxp.com;
>> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com; Mcnamara, John
>> <john.mcnamara@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
>> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; shahafs@mellanox.com;
>> olivier.matz@6wind.com
>> Subject: [PATCH v3 03/12] cryptodev: support security APIs
>>
> 
> ...
> 
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
>> b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
>> index 327d7e8..7a7c936 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
>> @@ -488,6 +488,16 @@ rte_cryptodev_devices_get(const char
>> *driver_name, uint8_t *devices,
>>   	return count;
>>   }
>>
>> +uint16_t
>> +rte_cryptodev_get_sec_id(uint8_t dev_id) {
>> +	if (rte_crypto_devices[dev_id].feature_flags &
>> +			RTE_CRYPTODEV_FF_SECURITY)
>> +		return rte_crypto_devices[dev_id].data->sec_id;
>> +
>> +	return INVALID_SEC_ID;
> 
> Is this better than returning an integer?
>  From a user point of view, I see better to check for negative,
> and other similar functions, such as rte_cryptodev_get_dev_id, return an integer.
> 

The API is replaced with another one in v4 which returns a pointer.

Thanks,
Akhil