All, Many thanks to vpp-dev team for helping us to drive this situation to a clear conclusion on a VPP project call just now. Special thanks to Damjan, who took initiative, followed up, and checked with LF FD.io<http://fd.io> team and Ed regarding options to deal with export-restricted crypto software libraries involved here. I also now understand that it’s only software cryptodev libraries that have export-restrictions and require external libraries. And that this does not apply to the hardware QAT cryptodev driver. This is good news for CSIT, as we actually mainly want to performance test the hardware QAT cards that the LF and CSIT team spent time upgrading the CPL FD.io<http://fd.io> physical testbed over the Xmas break.
Sergio, I understand that the immediate action is on you to separate SW and HW cryptodev hooks, so that VPP image can by default be built with HW QAT cryptodev support (no external library dependencies), and then we can use existing LF FD.io<http://fd.io> mechanics to pick up the VPP master-branch image from Nexus and test. No changes required in CSIT Jenkins jobs wiring :) Of so, pls confirm when this could be done, so that we can test drive it, and include it in the CSIT1701 report, or addendum thereof. Sergio, Damjan, Ed, Kirill, Peter, Jan - thank you again for driving this to conclusion. -Maciek P.S. re VPP call earlier today - Apologies if I came across on a bit of "a firm side", but I was just disgruntled with lack of progress on these email thread and all the multi-party LF FD.io<http://fd.io> and CSIT integration work coming to waste. I guess I owe few folks who were on a receiving end of my rant during the call, I owe them quite a few free pints of good English beer (or ale if you drink locally where I live). So bit it. You know who you are ! :) On 16 Jan 2017, at 19:42, Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkons...@cisco.com<mailto:mkons...@cisco.com>> wrote: //resending with corrected Kirill email +Ed - known to be able to resolve tricky cross-project build issues. +vpp-dev - to avoid circular thread references :) Sergio, On 11 Jan 2017, at 17:00, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.mon...@intel.com<mailto:sergio.gonzalez.mon...@intel.com>> wrote: I'll copy from the thread I started last week, we continue on this one. OK :) Basically, when we build VPP with DPDK Cryptodev support ('vpp_uses_dpdk_cryptodev=yes' at build time) we enable some Cryptodev PMDs that are disabled in DPDK by default. At the moment, the following Crypto PMDs are built: - QAT PMD: Driver for Intel QuickAssist Technology (QAT) devices. - AESNI-MB PMD: Software crypto with dependency on 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library' - AESNI-GCM PMD: Software crypto with dependency on 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library' The latest 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer' library source code is located in: https://github.com/01org/intel-ipsec-mb.git To successfully build DPDK with those PMDs enabled, we previously need to build the 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library' and set up the env variable AESNI_MULTI_BUFFER_LIB_PATH. Today csit-vpp-perf-* jobs use the VPP .deb packages from Nexus. Based on my (limited) understanding of build systems, this means VPP deb package that contains DPDK Cryptodev support needs to be built (using your build sequence above) and pushed to Nexus, *before* csit-vpp-perf-* job is invoke to run IPSec tests. Or am I oversimplifying? If yes - pls correct. If no - the next step would be to agree on the LF fd.io<http://fd.io/> based job implementation to execute above, and I guess it would involve ci-management project, or? Ed, can you help us here? Also FYI, as Jim Thompson noted, we would have at least another library dependency with the next DPDK release. I think you’re referring to this comment by Jim: There is a pending patch to use ISA-L rather than the Intel IPsec MB lib. from https://lists.fd.io/pipermail/csit-dev/2017-January/001423.html This would mean modifying the 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library’ building step while moving to the next DPDK release, yes? -Maciek P.S. This thread morphed from the previous one that went dormant: [csit-dev] VPP with DPDK Cryptodev CSIT IPsec tests https://lists.fd.io/pipermail/csit-dev/2017-January/001408.html Sergio On 11/01/2017 16:04, Jan Gelety -X (jgelety - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) wrote: + Sergio and Kirill From: csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io> [mailto:csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Jan Gelety -X (jgelety - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 14:44 To: Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com><mailto:damar...@cisco.com> Cc: csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io> Subject: [csit-dev] crypto-dev support/libraries Hello Damjan, As shortly mentioned on yesterday’s VPP call – could you, please, give us an info how to proceed when we need to test crypto related stuff? Do we need to build crypto libraries separately on every machine where the VPP will be run? Thank you very much. Regards, Jan _______________________________________________ csit-dev mailing list csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
