Hi Akhil, Please find my response in lined. Thanks, Ganapati
From: Akhil Goyal <gak...@marvell.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 1:41 PM To: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundap...@intel.com>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; fanzhang....@gmail.com; Ji, Kai <kai...@intel.com>; Power, Ciara <ciara.po...@intel.com>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S <abhinandan.guj...@intel.com>; Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheert...@intel.com>; Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> Subject: RE: RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific Hi Ganapati, Is it not possible to use rte_event_crypto_adapter_enqueue if you want to send the event context to cryptodev? [Ganapati] No, event crypto adapter sends only ev::event_ptr as rte_crypto_op to cryptodev and not event context. While using rte_cryptodev_enqueue() all previous stage event context is meant to be lost and It would send a new crypto request to cryptodev and is not supposed to be aware of event context. [Ganapati] Yes, proposal is for sending implementation specific value from eventdev to crypodev and vice versa P.S. Please fix your mail client to reply in plain text on mailing list. [Ganapati] Done Regards, Akhil From: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundap...@intel.com<mailto:ganapati.kundap...@intel.com>> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 1:22 PM To: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundap...@intel.com<mailto:ganapati.kundap...@intel.com>>; Akhil Goyal <gak...@marvell.com<mailto:gak...@marvell.com>>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org<mailto:dev@dpdk.org>>; fanzhang....@gmail.com<mailto:fanzhang....@gmail.com>; Ji, Kai <kai...@intel.com<mailto:kai...@intel.com>>; Power, Ciara <ciara.po...@intel.com<mailto:ciara.po...@intel.com>>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com<mailto:arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S <abhinandan.guj...@intel.com<mailto:abhinandan.guj...@intel.com>>; Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheert...@intel.com<mailto:jay.jayatheert...@intel.com>>; Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com<mailto:jerinjac...@gmail.com>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific Prioritize security for external emails: Confirm sender and content safety before clicking links or opening attachments ________________________________ Hi DPDK, Any comments on this proposal? Thanks, Ganapati From: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundap...@intel.com<mailto:ganapati.kundap...@intel.com>> Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2024 10:27 AM To: Akhil Goyal <gak...@marvell.com<mailto:gak...@marvell.com>>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org<mailto:dev@dpdk.org>>; fanzhang....@gmail.com<mailto:fanzhang....@gmail.com>; Ji, Kai <kai...@intel.com<mailto:kai...@intel.com>>; Power, Ciara <ciara.po...@intel.com<mailto:ciara.po...@intel.com>>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com<mailto:arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S <abhinandan.guj...@intel.com<mailto:abhinandan.guj...@intel.com>>; Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheert...@intel.com<mailto:jay.jayatheert...@intel.com>>; Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com<mailto:jerinjac...@gmail.com>> Subject: RE: RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific Hi Akhil, No changes in sequence of API's by adding 'uint8_t impl_opaque' to 'struct rte_crypto_op'. It's required in case application/event dispatcher passes some implementation specific value in rte_event::impl_opaque, to restore the value back on to rte_event::impl_opaque after enqueue to and dequeue from cryptodev. Here is the pseudocode for one of the use case Application/event dispatcher passes implementation specific value in rte_event::impl_opaque. struct rte_event ev; rte_event_dequeue_burst(..., &ev, ...) struct rte_crypto_op *crypto_op = ev.event_ptr; // ev.impl_opaque some implementation specific value rte_cryptodev_enqueue_burst(..., crypto_op, ...) ; // ev.impl_opaque is not passed to crypto_op With rte_crypto_op::impl_opaque field which is unchanged in library/driver crypto_op->impl_opaque = ev.impl_opaque; rte_cryptodev_enqueue_burst(..., crypto_op, ...) ; ... rte_crypto_dequeue_burst(..., crypto_op, ...) ev.event_ptr = crypto_op; ... rte_event_enqueue_burst(..., &ev, ...); // ev::impl_opaque value is lost with rte_crypto_op::impl_opaque field ev.event_ptr = crypto_op; ev.impl_opaque = crypto_op->impl_opaque; // implementation specific value in rte_event::impl_opaque restored back rte_event_enqueue_burst(..., &ev, ...); Thanks, Ganapati From: Akhil Goyal <gak...@marvell.com<mailto:gak...@marvell.com>> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 10:18 PM To: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundap...@intel.com<mailto:ganapati.kundap...@intel.com>>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org<mailto:dev@dpdk.org>>; fanzhang....@gmail.com<mailto:fanzhang....@gmail.com>; Ji, Kai <kai...@intel.com<mailto:kai...@intel.com>>; Power, Ciara <ciara.po...@intel.com<mailto:ciara.po...@intel.com>>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com<mailto:arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S <abhinandan.guj...@intel.com<mailto:abhinandan.guj...@intel.com>>; Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheert...@intel.com<mailto:jay.jayatheert...@intel.com>>; Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com<mailto:jerinjac...@gmail.com>> Subject: RE: RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific Hi Ganapati, Can you please explain the flow with a sequence of APIs to be used. Regards, Akhil From: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundap...@intel.com<mailto:ganapati.kundap...@intel.com>> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 12:44 PM To: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org<mailto:dev@dpdk.org>>; Akhil Goyal <gak...@marvell.com<mailto:gak...@marvell.com>>; fanzhang....@gmail.com<mailto:fanzhang....@gmail.com>; Ji, Kai <kai...@intel.com<mailto:kai...@intel.com>>; Power, Ciara <ciara.po...@intel.com<mailto:ciara.po...@intel.com>>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com<mailto:arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S <abhinandan.guj...@intel.com<mailto:abhinandan.guj...@intel.com>>; Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheert...@intel.com<mailto:jay.jayatheert...@intel.com>>; Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com<mailto:jerinjac...@gmail.com>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific Prioritize security for external emails: Confirm sender and content safety before clicking links or opening attachments ________________________________ Hi dpdk-dev, Can 'uint8_t reserved[1]' of 'struct rte_crypto_op' be renamed to 'uint8_t impl_opaque' for implementation specific? An implementation may use this field to hold implementation specific value to share value between dequeue and enqueue operation and crypto library/driver can also use this field to share implementation specfic value to event crypto adapter/application. 'struct rte_event' has 'uint8_t impl_opaque' member struct rte_event { ... uint8_t impl_opaque; /**< Implementation specific opaque value. * An implementation may use this field to hold * implementation specific value to share between * dequeue and enqueue operation. * The application should not modify this field. */ ... }; Event crypto adapter, on dequeuing the event, enqueues rte_event::event_ptr to cryptodev as rte_crypto_op and converts the dequeued crypto op to rte_event without restoring the implementation specific opaque value. By having the 'uint8_t impl_opaque' member in 'struct rte_crypto_op' as diff --git a/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h b/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h index dbc2700..af46ec9 100644 --- a/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h +++ b/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h @@ -146,10 +146,13 @@ struct rte_crypto_op { /**< TLS record */ } param1; /**< Additional per operation parameter 1. */ - uint8_t reserved[1]; - /**< Reserved bytes to fill 64 bits for - * future additions + uint8_t impl_opaque; + /**< Implementation specific opaque value. + * An implementation may use this field to hold + * implementation specific value to share between + * dequeue and enqueue operation. */ + which is untouched in library/driver and rte_event::impl_opaque field can be restored while enqueuing the event back to eventdev. Also crypto library/driver can use rte_crypto_op::impl_opaque field to share implementation specific opaque value to the event crypto adapter/application. I look forward to feedback on this proposal. Patch will be submitted for review once the initial feedback is received. Thank you, Ganapati
