Hi Pablo,
On 10/5/2017 1:49 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
Hi Akhil,
-----Original Message-----
From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Akhil Goyal
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 10:29 AM
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.dohe...@intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
<pablo.de.lara.gua...@intel.com>; hemant.agra...@nxp.com;
sta...@dpdk.org; Akhil Goyal <akhil.go...@nxp.com>
Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/crypto: fix dpaa2_sec macros and
definitions
Fixes: 7a364faef185 ("cryptodev: remove crypto device type enumeration")
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.go...@nxp.com>
---
test/test/test_cryptodev.c | 2 +-
test/test/test_cryptodev_perf.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/test/test/test_cryptodev.c b/test/test/test_cryptodev.c index
a4116c6..132f99c 100644
--- a/test/test/test_cryptodev.c
+++ b/test/test/test_cryptodev.c
@@ -1816,7 +1816,7 @@ test_authonly_dpaa2_sec_all(void)
ts_params->session_mpool,
ts_params->valid_devs[0],
rte_cryptodev_driver_id_get(
- RTE_STR(RTE_CRYPTODEV_DPAA2_SEC_PMD)),
+ RTE_STR(CRYPTODEV_NAME_DPAA2_SEC_PMD)),
BLKCIPHER_AUTHONLY_TYPE);
TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL(status, 0, "Test failed"); diff --git
a/test/test/test_cryptodev_perf.c b/test/test/test_cryptodev_perf.c index
3b57e6d..5df2e6e 100644
--- a/test/test/test_cryptodev_perf.c
+++ b/test/test/test_cryptodev_perf.c
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ static const char *pmd_name(uint8_t driver_id) {
uint8_t null_pmd = rte_cryptodev_driver_id_get(
RTE_STR(CRYPTODEV_NAME_NULL_PMD));
- uint8_t dpaa2_pmd = rte_cryptodev_driver_id_get(
+ uint8_t dpaa2_sec_pmd = rte_cryptodev_driver_id_get(
I think, in order to keep consistency, you should make this change also in
test_cryptodev.c:
test/test/test_cryptodev_blockcipher.c
580: int dpaa2_pmd = rte_cryptodev_driver_id_get(
646: else if (driver_id == dpaa2_pmd)
Also, I submitted a patch to remove test_cryptodev_perf.c.
I will apply this patch first, so it is easier to integrate in the stable
version,
but could you ack my patch if you are OK with it?
The sooner we remove it, the better, as we are investing a lot of time
in the crypto-perf app, and there is no need to maintain a duplicate, in my
opinion.
thanks for pointing this out. I would send a v2.
I have a question regarding test_cryptodev_perf.c for dpaa_sec patches.
The patchset for dpaa_sec includes changes in test_cryptodev_perf.c.
Do you plan to add those patches on the tree as well before removing
this file or I need to send another version?
In test/test/test_cryptodev_blockcipher.c, I missed out this change for
dpaa_sec also. So, I was sending another version for dpaa_sec patches to
include this change. Should I remove the changes in the
test_cryptodev_perf.c from the dpaa_sec patchset also?
Thanks,
Akhil
