Ah - thanks Konstantin - I will go back and review.
Regards,
Garry.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 5:53 PM Konstantin Ananyev
<konstantin.anan...@huawei.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Garry,
>
> > Hi Konstantin, Akhil,
> >
> > The patch is based on an issue I encountered when using the CPU_CRYPTO
> > support - I was having problems where the ipsec session lookup was
> > failing / was inconsistent.
> >
> > Examining the code in DPDK and looking for the use of
> > RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO I could see a reasonably
> > consistent pattern where if TYPE_NONE or TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO was set -
> > then the code was making use of ss->crypto.ses instead of
> > ss->security.ses.
> >
> > For example - see examples/ipsec-secgw.c where the one_session_free
> > function has the following code:
> >
> > if (ips->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_NONE ||
> > ips->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO) {
> > /* Session has not been created */
> > if (ips->crypto.ses == NULL)
> > return 0;
> >
> > ret = rte_cryptodev_sym_session_free(ips->crypto.dev_id,
> > ips->crypto.ses);
> > } else {
> > /* Session has not been created */
> > if (ips->security.ctx == NULL || ips->security.ses == NULL)
> > return 0;
> >
> > ret = rte_security_session_destroy(ips->security.ctx,
> > ips->security.ses);
> > }
> >
> > And similarly - if we look at the session_check function in lib/ipsec/ses.c:
> >
> > if (ss->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_NONE ||
> > ss->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO) {
> > if (ss->crypto.ses == NULL)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > } else {
> > if (ss->security.ses == NULL)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > if ((ss->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO ||
> > ss->type ==
> > RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL) &&
> > ss->security.ctx == NULL)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
>
> Thanks for explanation.
> Yes, I agree that TYPE_NONE and TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO both use crypto session
> to keep/propagate crypto related pamaters.
> What is not clear to me why for and TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO we need to store
> pointer to rte_ipsec_session as opaque user data for crypto session.
> As I remember, for lookaside crypto we need to do that to extract
> related rte_ipsec_session pointer from crypto_op, after lookaside crypto
> device
> finished the processing and sending sym-ops back to user.
> But for CPU_CRYPTO it is not necessary, as all processing is synchronous and
> user already has a pointer for related rte_ipsec_session.
> We probably still can, but what is the benefit, who will use it?
>
> Actually looking at the rte_ipsec_session_prepare() once again,
> you probably right - it is a bug here, as we shouldn’t call
> rte_security_session_opaque_data_set()
> for TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO.
> So shouldn't it be like that:
>
> ss->pkt_func = fp;
>
> if (ss->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_NONE)
> rte_cryptodev_sym_session_opaque_data_set(ss->crypto.ses,
> (uintptr_t)ss);
> - else
> + else if (ss->type != RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO)
> rte_security_session_opaque_data_set(ss->security.ses,
> (uintptr_t)ss);
>
> > Without the patch in rte_ipsec_session_prepare - for the
> > RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO type, then ss->crypto.ses will not
> > be set.
>
> Hmm... not clear why?
> AFAIK, ss->crypto.ses supposed to be set by user *before* calling
> rte_ipsec_session_prepare().
> From lib/ipsec/rte_ipsec.h:
> /**
> * Checks that inside given rte_ipsec_session crypto/security fields
> * are filled correctly and setups function pointers based on these values.
> * Expects that all fields except IPsec processing function pointers
> * (*pkt_func*) will be filled correctly by caller.
> * @param ss
> * Pointer to the *rte_ipsec_session* object
> * @return
> * - Zero if operation completed successfully.
> * - -EINVAL if the parameters are invalid.
> */
> int
> rte_ipsec_session_prepare(struct rte_ipsec_session *ss);
>
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Garry.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 1:09 AM Konstantin Ananyev
> > <konstantin.v.anan...@yandex.ru> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ipsec related processing in dpdk makes use of the crypto.ses opaque
> > > > data pointer. This patch updates rte_ipsec_session_prepare to set
> > > > ss->crypto.ses in the RTE_SECURITY_TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO case.
> > >
> > > Hmm.. not sure why we need to do that for CPU_CRYPTO?
> > > As I remember CPU_CRYPTO is synchronous operation and before calling
> > > rte_ipsec_pkt_cpu_prepare() should already know ipsec session these
> > > packets belong to.
> > > Can you probably explain the logic behind this patch a bit more?
> > > Konstantin
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Garry Marshall <gazma...@meaningfulname.net>
> > > > ---
> > > > lib/ipsec/ses.c | 3 ++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/lib/ipsec/ses.c b/lib/ipsec/ses.c
> > > > index d9ab1e6d2b..29eb5ff6ca 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/ipsec/ses.c
> > > > +++ b/lib/ipsec/ses.c
> > > > @@ -44,7 +44,8 @@ rte_ipsec_session_prepare(struct rte_ipsec_session
> > > > *ss)
> > > >
> > > > ss->pkt_func = fp;
> > > >
> > > > - if (ss->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_NONE)
> > > > + if (ss->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_NONE ||
> > > > + ss->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_CPU_CRYPTO)
> > > > rte_cryptodev_sym_session_opaque_data_set(ss->crypto.ses,
> > > > (uintptr_t)ss);
> > > > else
> > > > --
> > > > 2.39.2
>
