Re: [PATCH v2] devtools/cocci: update cocci for ethdev namespace

From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: "Singh, Aman Deep" <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] devtools/cocci: update cocci for ethdev namespace
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:30:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1843605.IobQ9Gjlxr@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c4adeb71-4b0d-b31e-9ce5-de30b72ae1cc@intel.com>

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.