Hi Akhil,
> -----Original Message----- > From: De Lara Guarch, Pablo > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 3:16 PM > To: Gujjar, Abhinandan S <[email protected]>; Akhil Goyal > <[email protected]>; Doherty, Declan <[email protected]>; Jacob, > Jerin <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Vangati, Narender <[email protected]>; Rao, > Nikhil <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] lib/cryptodev: add support to set session private > data > > Hi Abhinandan, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gujjar, Abhinandan S > > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 6:35 AM > > To: Akhil Goyal <[email protected]>; Doherty, Declan > > <[email protected]>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo > > <[email protected]>; Jacob, Jerin > > <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected]; Vangati, Narender <[email protected]>; Rao, > > Nikhil <[email protected]> > > Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] lib/cryptodev: add support to set session > > private data > > > > Hi Akhil, > > > > ... > > > I guess, you are suggesting below changes: > > diff --git a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h > > b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h > > index 56958a6..057c39a 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h > > +++ b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h > > @@ -892,6 +892,8 @@ struct rte_cryptodev_data { > > > > /** Cryptodev symmetric crypto session */ struct > > rte_cryptodev_sym_session { > > + uint16_t private_data_offset; > > + /**< Private data offset */ > > __extension__ void *sess_private_data[0]; > > /**< Private session material */ }; I am ok with this. > > > > Declan/Pablo, > > Is this ok? Do you see any impact on performance or anything else has > > to be considered? > > This is breaking ABI, and since there is a zero length array, this latter has > to be at > the end of the structure. > Therefore, this is not a valid option unless ABI deprecation is announced and > then it could be merged in the next release. What is your opinion on this? Should we consider retaining the enum rte_crypto_op_private_data_type? > > Pablo Abhinandan
