Hi Declan, I see, thank you very much for the clear clarification.
BR, Suanming > -----Original Message----- > From: Doherty, Declan <declan.dohe...@intel.com> > Sent: Monday, March 20, 2023 7:58 PM > To: Suanming Mou <suanmi...@nvidia.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: cryptodev API question with out of order support > > Hey Suanming, > > I haven't been actively involved in the development of DPDK in a number of > years but as far as I'm aware (and I don't believe this has changed > recently), out > of order processing from the cryptodev API user perspective is not supported, > and for most scenarios I'm aware of (for symmetric crypto processing) it would > not be desired, as data path protocols like IPsec or TLS expect packet order > to > be maintained. > > I know the crypto scheduler PMD allows out of order processing of operations > on worker cores, when it is working in a load balancing mode, but it's default > behaviour is to guarantee that packets/operations are returned in order to the > user after processing. > > If there are use cases for out of order processing (maybe for asymmetric > crypto) then I expected that at a minimum a per queue pair setup option would > be required and possibly a completion queue mechanism might be required. > > > Regards > Declan > > > On 20/03/2023 09:28, Suanming Mou wrote: > > Hi Declan, > > > > While reading the cryptodev API and define docs, I don’t see some > > places mention the out of order support. > > > > Does current crypto enqueue and dequeue function support out of order > > mode? Or should we add a hint capability flag for that? > > > > > > > Not sure if such topics have been discussed before, can you please > > help to clarify? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Suanming Mou > >
