|SUCCESS| common/mlx5: add ConnectX-10 SmartNIC

[dpdklab at iol.unh.edu]

Test-Label: ai-code-review
Test-Status: SUCCESS
https://dpdk.org/patch/163184

_AI Code Review_

=== Patch Review: series.patch (via Claude) ===
Review date: 2026-04-19

8f4a2b1d3c9e (assuming git sha based on patch metadata)
Author: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at nvidia.com>
Subject: common/mlx5: add ConnectX-10 SmartNIC

This patch adds the ConnectX-10 SmartNIC device ID to the list of NVIDIA
devices that run the mlx5 drivers. The device is still in development
stage.

> diff --git a/drivers/common/mlx5/mlx5_common.h b/drivers/common/mlx5/mlx5_common.h
> index 47fcc3fb06..b8f0235f47 100644
> --- a/drivers/common/mlx5/mlx5_common.h
> +++ b/drivers/common/mlx5/mlx5_common.h
> @@ -155,6 +155,7 @@ enum {
>  	PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_BLUEFIELD3 = 0Xa2dc,
>  	PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_CONNECTX8 = 0x1023,
>  	PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_CONNECTX9 = 0x1025,
> +	PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_CONNECTX10 = 0x1027,

The hexadecimal constant formatting is inconsistent with the surrounding
code. Should this use uppercase 'X' in '0X1027' to match the formatting
of PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_BLUEFIELD3 = 0Xa2dc, or should the existing
entries be updated?

>  	PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_BLUEFIELD4 = 0xa2df,
>  };
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/mlx5/mlx5_crypto.c b/drivers/crypto/mlx5/mlx5_crypto.c
> index 240e8bb858..e974297961 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/mlx5/mlx5_crypto.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/mlx5/mlx5_crypto.c
> @@ -491,6 +491,10 @@ static const struct rte_pci_id mlx5_crypto_pci_id_map[] = {
>  			RTE_PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_MELLANOX,
>  					PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_CONNECTX9)
>  		},
> +		{
> +			RTE_PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_MELLANOX,
> +					PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_CONNECTX10)
> +		},

Does the alignment of PCI_DEVICE_ID_MELLANOX_CONNECTX10 match the
existing code style? The indentation appears to use tabs followed by
spaces, but can you verify this matches the surrounding entries exactly?

[ ... ]