> On 2/12/2020 1:48 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote: > > Hi Ferruh, > >> > >> > >> Since both using the rte_security, for a PMD isn't there a way to say if > >> it is > >> supporting any one of them or both? If so what do you think documenting it > too? > >> > > I think that is mentioned in the rte_security capabilities about the action > > types > > Which are supported by the driver. One of the dev->security_ctx->ops is to > > get > the security > > Capabilities which will return the supported action type by the PMD. > > > > I am not sure if we can add that here or not. It is your call. > > > > I think it make sense to document action types needs to be supported to claim > that the feature is supported, but most probably you will judge better on the > matter.
If we can add specifics of security in ethernet feature definition, Then probably we can add **[provides] rte_security_ops, capabilities_get**: `` action: RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO `` For inline crypto And **[provides] rte_security_ops, capabilities_get**: `` action: RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL`` Please check my syntax if it is not correct.
