Hi Akhil,
<snip>
> On 3/22/2019 7:17 PM, Bernard Iremonger wrote:
> > Fix xform initialisation.
> > Fix testsuite_setup.
> > Loop on rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst() calls.
> > Remove unused variables.
> >
> > Fixes: 05fe65eb66b2 ("test/ipsec: introduce functional test")
> > Fixes: 59d7353b0df0 ("test/ipsec: fix test suite setup")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremon...@intel.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > Increase DEQUEUE_COUNT to 1000
> > Loop on other 2 rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst() calls.
> >
> > app/test/test_ipsec.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> ----
> > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test/test_ipsec.c b/app/test/test_ipsec.c index
> > 80a2d25..3769e56 100644
> > --- a/app/test/test_ipsec.c
> > +++ b/app/test/test_ipsec.c
> > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
> > #define OUTBOUND_SPI 17
> > #define BURST_SIZE 32
> > #define REORDER_PKTS 1
> > +#define DEQUEUE_COUNT 1000
> >
> > struct user_params {
> > enum rte_crypto_sym_xform_type auth; @@ -79,7 +80,6 @@ struct
> > ipsec_unitest_params {
> > struct rte_mbuf *obuf[BURST_SIZE], *ibuf[BURST_SIZE],
> > *testbuf[BURST_SIZE];
> >
> > - uint8_t *digest;
> > uint16_t pkt_index;
> > };
> >
> > @@ -111,8 +111,6 @@ static struct ipsec_testsuite_params testsuite_params
> = { NULL };
> > static struct ipsec_unitest_params unittest_params;
> > static struct user_params uparams;
> >
> > -static uint8_t global_key[128] = { 0 };
> > -
> > struct supported_cipher_algo {
> > const char *keyword;
> > enum rte_crypto_cipher_algorithm algo; @@ -215,30 +213,26 @@
> > fill_crypto_xform(struct ipsec_unitest_params *ut_params,
> > const struct supported_auth_algo *auth_algo,
> > const struct supported_cipher_algo *cipher_algo)
> > {
> > - ut_params->auth_xform.type = RTE_CRYPTO_SYM_XFORM_AUTH;
> > - ut_params->auth_xform.auth.algo = auth_algo->algo;
> > - ut_params->auth_xform.auth.key.data = global_key;
> > - ut_params->auth_xform.auth.key.length = auth_algo->key_len;
> > - ut_params->auth_xform.auth.digest_length = auth_algo->digest_len;
> > - ut_params->auth_xform.auth.op = RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_OP_VERIFY;
> > -
> > ut_params->cipher_xform.type = RTE_CRYPTO_SYM_XFORM_CIPHER;
> > ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.algo = cipher_algo->algo;
> > - ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.key.data = global_key;
> > - ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.key.length = cipher_algo->key_len;
> > - ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.op =
> RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_DECRYPT;
> > - ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.iv.offset = IV_OFFSET;
> > - ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.iv.length = cipher_algo->iv_len;
> > + ut_params->auth_xform.type = RTE_CRYPTO_SYM_XFORM_AUTH;
> > + ut_params->auth_xform.auth.algo = auth_algo->algo;
> >
> > if (ut_params->ipsec_xform.direction ==
> > RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_DIR_INGRESS) {
> > - ut_params->crypto_xforms = &ut_params->auth_xform;
> > - ut_params->auth_xform.next = &ut_params->cipher_xform;
> > + ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.op =
> > + RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_DECRYPT;
> > + ut_params->auth_xform.auth.op =
> RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_OP_VERIFY;
> > ut_params->cipher_xform.next = NULL;
> > + ut_params->auth_xform.next = &ut_params->cipher_xform;
> > + ut_params->crypto_xforms = &ut_params->auth_xform;
> > } else {
> > - ut_params->crypto_xforms = &ut_params->cipher_xform;
> > - ut_params->cipher_xform.next = &ut_params->auth_xform;
> > + ut_params->cipher_xform.cipher.op =
> > + RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_ENCRYPT;
> > + ut_params->auth_xform.auth.op =
> RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_OP_GENERATE;
> > ut_params->auth_xform.next = NULL;
> > + ut_params->cipher_xform.next = &ut_params->auth_xform;
> > + ut_params->crypto_xforms = &ut_params->cipher_xform;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > @@ -287,9 +281,12 @@ testsuite_setup(void)
> > int rc;
> >
> > memset(ts_params, 0, sizeof(*ts_params));
> > + memset(ut_params, 0, sizeof(*ut_params));
> > + memset(&uparams, 0, sizeof(struct user_params));
> >
> > uparams.auth = RTE_CRYPTO_SYM_XFORM_AUTH;
> > uparams.cipher = RTE_CRYPTO_SYM_XFORM_CIPHER;
> > + uparams.aead = RTE_CRYPTO_SYM_XFORM_NOT_SPECIFIED;
> > strcpy(uparams.auth_algo, "null");
> > strcpy(uparams.cipher_algo, "null");
> >
> > @@ -759,6 +756,7 @@ crypto_ipsec(uint16_t num_pkts)
> > struct ipsec_unitest_params *ut_params = &unittest_params;
> > uint32_t k, ng;
> > struct rte_ipsec_group grp[1];
> > + int i = 0;
> >
> > /* call crypto prepare */
> > k = rte_ipsec_pkt_crypto_prepare(&ut_params->ss[0],
> > ut_params->ibuf, @@ -774,8 +772,12 @@ crypto_ipsec(uint16_t num_pkts)
> > return TEST_FAILED;
> > }
> >
> > - k = rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst(ts_params->valid_dev, 0,
> > - ut_params->cop, num_pkts);
> > + while ((k = rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst(ts_params->valid_dev, 0,
> > + ut_params->cop, num_pkts)) == 0 && i <
> DEQUEUE_COUNT) {
> > + rte_pause();
> > + i++;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (k != num_pkts) {
> > RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1, "rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst fail\n");
> > return TEST_FAILED;
> > @@ -890,8 +892,12 @@ crypto_ipsec_2sa(void)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - k = rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst(ts_params->valid_dev, 0,
> > - ut_params->cop, BURST_SIZE);
> > + while ((k = rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst(ts_params->valid_dev, 0,
> > + ut_params->cop, BURST_SIZE)) == 0 &&
> > + i < DEQUEUE_COUNT) {
> > + rte_pause();
> > + i++;
> > + }
> > if (k != BURST_SIZE) {
> > RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1, "rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst fail\n");
> > return TEST_FAILED;
> > @@ -1029,8 +1035,12 @@ crypto_ipsec_2sa_4grp(void)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - k = rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst(ts_params->valid_dev, 0,
> > - ut_params->cop, BURST_SIZE);
> > + while ((k = rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst(ts_params->valid_dev, 0,
> > + ut_params->cop, BURST_SIZE)) == 0 &&
> > + i < DEQUEUE_COUNT) {
> > + rte_pause();
> > + i++;
> > + }
> > if (k != BURST_SIZE) {
> > RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1, "rte_cryptodev_dequeue_burst fail\n");
> > return TEST_FAILED;
> The logic for dequeue is not correct here.
>
> In case of hardware crypto PMD, there may be a case where we have lesser
> number of dequeues as compared to the number of enqueues in one cycle.
> Hardware PMDs are usually slow and may not give back packets in the same
> cycle. So, multiple dequeues(say a few hundred) shall be done until we get the
> enqueued_ops = dequeued_ops. But that would also be tricky here as we need
> to increment the pointer to the cop as well.
>
> Regards,
> Akhil
There are two issues in this patch, the test initialisation and the dequeue
logic.
I will send the fixes as separate patches.
Regards,
Bernard.
