[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] net/ixgbe: fix build issue

[David Marchand]

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau at intel.com> wrote:
> On 10/26/2017 11:36 AM, David Marchand wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Build fails when rte_security is disabled; make rte_security mandatory
>>> Fixes: 9a0752f498d2 ("net/ixgbe: enable inline IPsec")
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/net/ixgbe/Makefile | 6 ++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/Makefile b/drivers/net/ixgbe/Makefile
>>> index f03c426..c879828 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/Makefile
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/Makefile
>>> @@ -31,6 +31,12 @@
>>>
>>>   include $(RTE_SDK)/mk/rte.vars.mk
>>>
>>> +ifneq ($(MAKECMDGOALS),clean)
>>> +ifneq ($(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_SECURITY),y)
>>> +$(error "RTE_LIBRTE_SECURITY is required to build RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_PMD")
>>> +endif
>>> +endif
>>> +
>>>   #
>>>   # library name
>>>   #
>>
>> This is a no go for me unless you explain how it is impossible to
>> disable it in the code.
>>
>>
> It can be disabled in the code, but as far as I know there is a general push
> back against having conditionally compiled code. I originally had the
> security sections in ixgbe PMD isolated, but the feedback was to have them
> always on.

In my mind, this was to stop having features enabled per pmd (and stop
the nightmare with 10 options in a pmd).
Having features globally enabled for all or nothing is still
acceptable, is it not ?


> An alternative solution will be to remove the option altogether and always
> build rte_security library.

As a general rule, I prefer enabling only the things I use, but I am
not against this ?
Can you confirm the performance impact is negligible, always having
this in the pmds ?


Thanks.
-- 
David Marchand