[EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/2] ethdev: add IPsec event subtype range for PMD specific code

[Akhil Goyal]

> On 10/4/2023 1:59 PM, Nithin Dabilpuram wrote:
> > Add IPsec event subtype range for PMD specific code in order
> > to accommodate wide range of errors that PMD supports.
> > These IPsec event subtypes are used when an error doesn't
> > match the spec defined subtypes between
> RTE_ETH_EVENT_IPSEC_UNKNOWN
> > and RTE_ETH_EVENT_IPSEC_MAX. Adding this as -ve error range
> > to avoid ABI breakage.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nithin Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram at marvell.com>
> > ---
> >  lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> > index 8542257721..f949dfc83d 100644
> > --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> > +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> > @@ -3905,6 +3905,10 @@ struct rte_eth_event_macsec_desc {
> >   * eth device.
> >   */
> >  enum rte_eth_event_ipsec_subtype {
> > +	/**  PMD specific error start */
> > +	RTE_ETH_EVENT_IPSEC_PMD_ERROR_START = -256,
> > +	/**  PMD specific error end */
> > +	RTE_ETH_EVENT_IPSEC_PMD_ERROR_END = -1,
> >  	/** Unknown event type */
> >  	RTE_ETH_EVENT_IPSEC_UNKNOWN = 0,
> >  	/** Sequence number overflow */
> >
> 
> I don't see any problem to extend event subtype with custom error range,
> @Akhil, @Anoob what do you think?

I believe it is ok to add the custom error range.
It is just that the user will need to check the negative values too, which I believe is ok.

Acked-by: Akhil Goyal <gakhil at marvell.com>