Hi Akhil,
> As per current design, rte_cryptodev_sym_session_create() and
> rte_cryptodev_sym_session_init() use separate mempool objects
> for a single session.
> And structure rte_cryptodev_sym_session is not directly used
> by the application, it may cause ABI breakage if the structure
> is modified in future.
>
> To address these two issues, the rte_cryptodev_sym_session_create
> will take one mempool object for both the session and session
> private data. The API rte_cryptodev_sym_session_init will now not
> take mempool object.
> rte_cryptodev_sym_session_create will now return an opaque session
> pointer which will be used by the app in rte_cryptodev_sym_session_init
> and other APIs.
>
> With this change, rte_cryptodev_sym_session_init will send
> pointer to session private data of corresponding driver to the PMD
> based on the driver_id for filling the PMD data.
>
> In data path, opaque session pointer is attached to rte_crypto_op
> and the PMD can call an internal library API to get the session
> private data pointer based on the driver id.
>
> Note: currently nb_drivers are getting updated in RTE_INIT which
> result in increasing the memory requirements for session.
> User can compile off drivers which are not in use to reduce the
> memory consumption of a session.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akhil Goyal <gak...@marvell.com>
> ---
With that patch ipsec-secgw functional tests crashes for AES_GCM test-cases.
To be more specific:
examples/ipsec-secgw/test/run_test.sh -4 tun_aesgcm
[24126592.561071] traps: dpdk-ipsec-secg[3254860] general protection fault
ip:7f3ac2397027 sp:7ffeaade8848 error:0 in
libIPSec_MB.so.1.0.0[7f3ac238f000+2a20000]
Looking a bit deeper, it fails at:
#0 0x00007ff9274f4027 in aes_keyexp_128_enc_avx512 ()
from /lib/libIPSec_MB.so.1
#1 0x00007ff929f0ac97 in aes_gcm_pre_128_avx_gen4 ()
from /lib/libIPSec_MB.so.1
#2 0x0000561757073753 in aesni_gcm_session_configure (mb_mgr=0x56175c5fe400,
session=0x17e3b72d8, xform=0x17e05d7c0)
at ../drivers/crypto/ipsec_mb/pmd_aesni_gcm.c:132
#3 0x00005617570592af in ipsec_mb_sym_session_configure (
dev=0x56175be0c940 <rte_crypto_devices>, xform=0x17e05d7c0,
sess=0x17e3b72d8) at ../drivers/crypto/ipsec_mb/ipsec_mb_ops.c:330
#4 0x0000561753b4d6ae in rte_cryptodev_sym_session_init (dev_id=0 '\000',
sess_opaque=0x17e3b4940, xforms=0x17e05d7c0)
at ../lib/cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c:1736
#5 0x0000561752ef99b7 in create_lookaside_session (
ipsec_ctx=0x56175aa6a210 <lcore_conf+1105232>, sa=0x17e05d140,
ips=0x17e05d140) at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c:145
#6 0x0000561752f0cf98 in fill_ipsec_session (ss=0x17e05d140,
ctx=0x56175aa6a210 <lcore_conf+1105232>, sa=0x17e05d140)
at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c:89
#7 0x0000561752f0d7dd in ipsec_process (
ctx=0x56175aa6a210 <lcore_conf+1105232>, trf=0x7ffd192326a0)
at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c:300
#8 0x0000561752f21027 in process_pkts_outbound (
--Type <RET> for more, q to quit, c to continue without paging--
ipsec_ctx=0x56175aa6a210 <lcore_conf+1105232>, traffic=0x7ffd192326a0)
at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c:839
#9 0x0000561752f21b2e in process_pkts (
qconf=0x56175aa57340 <lcore_conf+1027712>, pkts=0x7ffd19233c20,
nb_pkts=1 '\001', portid=1) at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c:1072
#10 0x0000561752f224db in ipsec_poll_mode_worker ()
at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c:1262
#11 0x0000561752f38adc in ipsec_launch_one_lcore (args=0x56175c549700)
at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_worker.c:654
#12 0x0000561753cbc523 in rte_eal_mp_remote_launch (
f=0x561752f38ab5 <ipsec_launch_one_lcore>, arg=0x56175c549700,
call_main=CALL_MAIN) at ../lib/eal/common/eal_common_launch.c:64
#13 0x0000561752f265ed in main (argc=12, argv=0x7ffd19234168)
at ../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c:2978
(gdb) frame 2
#2 0x0000561757073753 in aesni_gcm_session_configure (mb_mgr=0x56175c5fe400,
session=0x17e3b72d8, xform=0x17e05d7c0)
at ../drivers/crypto/ipsec_mb/pmd_aesni_gcm.c:132
132 mb_mgr->gcm128_pre(key, &sess->gdata_key);
Because of un-expected unaligned memory access:
(gdb) disas
Dump of assembler code for function aes_keyexp_128_enc_avx512:
0x00007ff9274f400b <+0>: endbr64
0x00007ff9274f400f <+4>: cmp $0x0,%rdi
0x00007ff9274f4013 <+8>: je 0x7ff9274f41b4
<aes_keyexp_128_enc_avx512+425>
0x00007ff9274f4019 <+14>: cmp $0x0,%rsi
0x00007ff9274f401d <+18>: je 0x7ff9274f41b4
<aes_keyexp_128_enc_avx512+425>
0x00007ff9274f4023 <+24>: vmovdqu (%rdi),%xmm1
=> 0x00007ff9274f4027 <+28>: vmovdqa %xmm1,(%rsi)
(gdb) print/x $rsi
$12 = 0x17e3b72e8
And this is caused because now AES_GCM session private data is not 16B-bits
aligned anymore:
(gdb) print ((struct aesni_gcm_session *)sess->sess_data[index].data)
$29 = (struct aesni_gcm_session *) 0x17e3b72d8
print &((struct aesni_gcm_session *)sess->sess_data[index].data)->gdata_key
$31 = (struct gcm_key_data *) 0x17e3b72e8
As I understand the reason for that is that we changed the way how
sess_data[index].data
is populated. Now it is just:
sess->sess_data[index].data = (void *)((uint8_t *)sess +
rte_cryptodev_sym_get_header_session_size() +
(index * sess->priv_sz));
So, as I can see, there is no guarantee that PMD's private sess data will be
aligned on 16B
as expected.
