From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] crypto/ccp: add support for AMD CCP crypto PMD Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 19:50:41 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1512047553-118101-1-git-send-email-Ravi1.kumar@amd.com> <1512047553-118101-2-git-send-email-Ravi1.kumar@amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Ravi Kumar , "dev@dpdk.org" Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C83229CF for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 20:50:44 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <1512047553-118101-2-git-send-email-Ravi1.kumar@amd.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Ravi, > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ravi Kumar > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 1:12 PM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/11] crypto/ccp: add support for AMD CCP > crypto PMD >=20 As I said in the another patch, you should add a commit message for complex= patches like this one. Another thing that would be useful for improving the readability of the pat= chset and therefore, make a review easier, is to split a long patch in smaller patches. >>From what I have seen, you have some patches where you are adding support f= or CMAC and SHA3 algorithms. I suggest to do the same for the other algorithms that this PMD= supports. So, the first patch would have the skeleton of the PMD, and then you can ha= ve a separate patch per algorithm. Well, not necessarily, a patch per algorithm, but per subset of algorithms. I would propose one for AES-CBC/ECB/CTR, one for 3DES-CBC, one for AES-GCM and another one for SHA-x algorithms. Thanks, Pablo