Hello, On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 09:36, Maxime Leroy <[email protected]> wrote: > > @@ -4526,10 +4524,14 @@ cryptodev_dpaa2_sec_probe(struct rte_dpaa2_driver > > *dpaa2_drv __rte_unused, > > static int > > cryptodev_dpaa2_sec_remove(struct rte_dpaa2_device *dpaa2_dev) > > { > > + char cryptodev_name[RTE_CRYPTODEV_NAME_MAX_LEN]; > > struct rte_cryptodev *cryptodev; > > int ret; > > > > - cryptodev = dpaa2_dev->cryptodev; > > + snprintf(cryptodev_name, sizeof(cryptodev_name), "dpsec-%d", > > + dpaa2_dev->object_id); > > + > > + cryptodev = rte_cryptodev_pmd_get_named_dev(cryptodev_name); > > if (cryptodev == NULL) > > return -ENODEV; > > > > -- > > 2.51.0 > > > Should we add a function to generate the cryptodev name instead of > duplicating the code, similar to how it’s done for PCI devices (i.e., > rte_pci_device_name)?
I am not sure I get the parallel.. rte_pci_device_name is a bus level name, I don't see how we could define a fslmc bus level helper that would help here. Ah, you mean adding a helper internal to this cryptodev driver? I can respin this today, but after this, I'll be offline for the rest of the week (ovscon 2025). Btw, this series is a cleanup (those drivers have been like this for a long time), and it can be deferred to next release if we are too short on time. On the other hand, the fixes from https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=36702 seem valid for 25.11.0 (or at least backport material for 25.11.1). -- David Marchand
