10/02/2022 14:26, Singh, Aman Deep: > On 2/4/2022 1:17 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 04/02/2022 07:13, Singh, Aman Deep: > >> Hi Thomas > >> > >> On 2/3/2022 2:31 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>> 23/01/2022 18:20, Aman Singh: > >>>> Added two specific exceptions for ETH_SPEED_10G > >>>> and ETH_SPEED_25G to avoid there name change. > >>>> Added check for ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER and ETH_RSS_RETA > >>> Please could you explain why? > >> These two macro's ETH_SPEED_10G & ETH_SPEED_25G are used by ifpga > >> driver and script should no change these. > >> There are multiple ETH_SPEED_NUM_xxx macro that need to be changed > >> to RTE_ETH_SPEED_NUM_xxx. So added above two as specific exceptions. > > Why doing this exception? What is special with ifpga? > > These two macro's are defined in 'ifpga/base/opae_eth_group.h' > we don't intend to change these. Target is ethdev namespace only.
So we will miss future use of a deprecated macro because ifpga is redefining it? I think it is a wrong approach. We should not make any exception in the check. Instead we can just ignore the warning for ifpga. > >> The other two patterns ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER & ETH_RSS_RETA were missed before. > >> The script should change these to RTE_ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER & RTE_ETH_RSS_RETA > > The explanations should be part of the commit log please. > > Sure, if this explanation is fine? Will update in next version. Yes thanks.
