Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anoob Joseph <ano...@marvell.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 4, 2024 1:13 PM
> To: Suanming Mou <suanmi...@nvidia.com>; Ciara Power
> <ciara.po...@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH 2/2] app/test-crypto-perf: fix encrypt operation
> verify
>
> Hi Suanming,
>
> Please see inline.
>
> Thanks,
> Anoob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Suanming Mou <suanmi...@nvidia.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2024 9:26 AM
> > To: Ciara Power <ciara.po...@intel.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: [EXT] [PATCH 2/2] app/test-crypto-perf: fix encrypt operation
> > verify
> >
> > External Email
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > AEAD users RTE_CRYPTO_AEAD_OP_* with aead_op and CIPHER uses
> [Anoob] users -> uses
>
> > RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_* with cipher_op in current code.
> >
> > This commit aligns aead_op and cipher_op operation to fix incorrect
> > AEAD verification.
> >
> > Fixes: df52cb3b6e13 ("app/crypto-perf: move verify as single test
> > type")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suanming Mou <suanmi...@nvidia.com>
> > ---
> > app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_test_verify.c | 9 +++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_test_verify.c
> > b/app/test-crypto- perf/cperf_test_verify.c index
> > 8aa714b969..525a2b1373 100644
> > --- a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_test_verify.c
> > +++ b/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_test_verify.c
> > @@ -113,6 +113,7 @@ cperf_verify_op(struct rte_crypto_op *op,
> > uint8_t *data;
> > uint32_t cipher_offset, auth_offset;
> > uint8_t cipher, auth;
> > + bool is_encrypt = false;
> > int res = 0;
> >
> > if (op->status != RTE_CRYPTO_OP_STATUS_SUCCESS) @@ -154,12
> > +155,14 @@ cperf_verify_op(struct rte_crypto_op *op,
> > cipher_offset = 0;
> > auth = 0;
> > auth_offset = 0;
> > + is_encrypt = options->cipher_op ==
> > RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_ENCRYPT;
> > break;
> > case CPERF_CIPHER_THEN_AUTH:
> > cipher = 1;
> > cipher_offset = 0;
> > auth = 1;
> > auth_offset = options->test_buffer_size;
> > + is_encrypt = options->cipher_op ==
> > RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_ENCRYPT;
> > break;
> > case CPERF_AUTH_ONLY:
> > cipher = 0;
> > @@ -172,12 +175,14 @@ cperf_verify_op(struct rte_crypto_op *op,
> > cipher_offset = 0;
> > auth = 1;
> > auth_offset = options->test_buffer_size;
> > + is_encrypt = options->cipher_op ==
> > RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_ENCRYPT;
> > break;
> > case CPERF_AEAD:
> > cipher = 1;
> > cipher_offset = 0;
> > - auth = 1;
> > + auth = options->aead_op == RTE_CRYPTO_AEAD_OP_ENCRYPT;
> > auth_offset = options->test_buffer_size;
> > + is_encrypt = !!auth;
> > break;
> > default:
> > res = 1;
> > @@ -185,7 +190,7 @@ cperf_verify_op(struct rte_crypto_op *op,
> > }
> >
> > if (cipher == 1) {
> > - if (options->cipher_op == RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_ENCRYPT)
> > + if (is_encrypt)
>
> [Anoob] A similar check is there under 'auth == 1' check, right? Won't that
> also
> need fixing?
>
> if (auth == 1) {
> if (options->auth_op == RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_OP_GENERATE)
>
> I think some renaming of the local variables might make code better.
> bool cipher, digest_verify = false, is_encrypt = false;
>
> case CPERF_CIPHER_THEN_AUTH:
> cipher = true;
> cipher_offset = 0;
> if (options->cipher_op == RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_ENCRYPT) {
> is_encrypt = true;
> digest_verify = true; /* Assumption - options->auth_op
> == RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_OP_GENERATE is verified elsewhere */
> auth_offset = options->test_buffer_size;
> }
> break;
> <...>
> case CPERF_AEAD:
> cipher = true;
> cipher_offset = 0;
> if (options->aead_op ==
> RTE_CRYPTO_AEAD_OP_ENCRYPT) {
> is_encrypt = true;
> digest_verify = true;
> auth_offset = options->test_buffer_size;
> }
>
> What do you think?
Yes, so we can totally remove the auth for now. I will do that. Thanks for the
suggestion.
>
> > res += !!memcmp(data + cipher_offset,
> > vector->ciphertext.data,
> > options->test_buffer_size);
> > --
> > 2.34.1
