From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45D02471B8; Thu, 8 Jan 2026 17:30:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 385FF402D3; Thu, 8 Jan 2026 17:30:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ed1-f53.google.com (mail-ed1-f53.google.com [209.85.208.53]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A724027A for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2026 17:30:08 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ed1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-64b9cb94ff5so4820622a12.2 for ; Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:30:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1767889808; x=1768494608; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=G8CehXJs6TOI9TdOndPqffAcxA7BOWLpKChSt+qef4w=; b=YrR5ZxqpESjy+35x918DrjoUWjR2hfBOw404UTZiGOiAMTEtC6K2aFDADNcIrinOy9 vB2sR6KAr+kx21EP7klQUgtx9mbt+w3Mfy6cg4asEIXO1IXA6QLyjgCMof4kmjjScmAY wK8Ms44TgnV//rXMASj14sk0Al0NlvFhWU8U0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1767889808; x=1768494608; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=G8CehXJs6TOI9TdOndPqffAcxA7BOWLpKChSt+qef4w=; b=hjUraBiovVH+bqbIVE9bT6HIxopXK0FO+ROkVmZFvrwh4KtHXDCB8gnX+jPr2vrvjc ao0Hucxha0znb0fBWedlg2wYcaNYBB1YlQTgd4/RsBQP+M+M7zlyidCV6Joiw8j/JBbX mJQ4ZzbzncvFMHjo6Af+7HzUrtuJSTVSULWVrp7p0bGcsuPoPJQHWV7yipv2xk+adSYr J4iskoDKj/B7Ur2FYQ5kU2pyj9ggIlPOqKStY7lc5FeD7tn9jCNtZUwxLAlOCEl0CN4t Pwp1BOEsbuWBZHCDkTStRjeycqAjg01S65P7lgh0dUJ9jEiJ1wrq8/hhIG07/nPCWceI fd1A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCW8O9jgHdn7c1hqGhY/4kJQINsGhdj4MwRN+jjXeCONHYqjHqk3MUY6bY+ckP3ID+e8wek=@dpdk.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx2Wn7SrEAGXQba6vBR/OeqipdcfRyL4lH9Ixvp42+ONwms0t7n tOe7vUms4QSL6pUhYxUpC12RzLWVHcVDBJWPAg7a/R2zczZ6lRqYTzyPLytTLfIe4Th8Dm4f7OF sQ4CN6B7uJfUBEZyJZh78B6SMT4ZxpF+XwOK44kutHA== X-Gm-Gg: AY/fxX7kTRmOX+KMWDSsI8E6PQLMl1lxm5jMLz0lH3YppqrXY4nvlYUzDHF1Mb1ZZCb U5z4IhMWNBvJsjC/I2967GdLfQ3MUshuAegIZSQoH/W2vumn5PmU6QaovKqWWd71g5LUaPKZDGt y6pUlp5La0xfMDqK3/Y40nBsKZdb6fJdxzBx5j28KzzgO6bBQjZHfmQKQyujIKGkxflNgPkbgxD GR6qJc8kHVmOx3CsJPsdfVescP/zZf2gsdnob/eEGEV4w2pYs5QE0Elp70VhRRvT7il92Hcd5VT gmKO95HCOSU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFQhKvey4wyLJZto0FlzFbz4hYOC98Oophtrk6EM2LGmW/ZStWIjGN6POEr2L9KICE/++NTlXOpANADGSD+79A= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:27ca:b0:64b:4212:9d4d with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-65097e4d1ecmr5380314a12.21.1767889807918; Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:30:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20260105190647.63244-1-abailey@iol.unh.edu> <20260105190647.63244-3-abailey@iol.unh.edu> In-Reply-To: From: Andrew Bailey Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 11:29:55 -0500 X-Gm-Features: AQt7F2oNKjDBMtVffLYzs5f7uhQoZGkDTQ0lVeKzaHJ7H3x3-Dxg7ljk3hPruuE Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] dts: add cryptodev testsuite To: Patrick Robb Cc: luca.vizzarro@arm.com, dmarx@iol.unh.edu, dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000000d5920647e2ec86" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org --00000000000000d5920647e2ec86 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > > + print(f"Skipping test: {e}") >> + raise >> + app.print_stats(results) >> + self._verify_throughput(results) >> + >> + @func_test >> + def openssl_aead_aes_gcm_encrypt(self) -> None: >> + """Basic test to run on all NICs with openssl virtual device. >> > > I don't know about the description above because the testing is being run > on the vdev, not any NIC (which really isn't involved in the test). > > I see from DPDK docs that crypto_openssl vdev supports aead aes-gcm, but > so do the physical devices, and you have a separate QAT case like the > openssl one above (and maybe this is a good solution). Is the idea to have > a testcase per device (physical or virtual) per algo? > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides-25.11/cryptodevs/overview.html#supported-aead-algorithms > The idea as of currently was to go through every run of the cryptodev application that I saw in old DTS and make a test case per run of the app. The openssl test case was for development and can be ignored, which I failed to note in my submission. There are runs for virtual devices that I plan to include within this testsuite by the end of it and each will have its own test case. > > >> + @func_test > > + def a_wrong_devtype(self) -> None: >> > > Can you explain the name of this test and its purpose? > The last 3 test cases can be ignored as I made them for debugging purposes in development. I simply forgot to remove them prior to my submission. > > --00000000000000d5920647e2ec86 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=

+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 print(f"Skipping test: {e}&= quot;)
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 raise
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 app.print_stats(results)
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 self._verify_throughput(results)
+
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 @func_test
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 def openssl_aead_aes_gcm_encrypt(self) -> None:
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 """Basic test to run on all NIC= s with openssl virtual device.

I don= 9;t know about the description above because the testing is being run on th= e vdev, not any NIC (which really isn't involved in the test).

I see from DPDK docs that crypto_openssl vdev supports aea= d aes-gcm, but so do the physical devices, and you have a separate QAT case= like the openssl one above (and maybe this is a good solution). Is the ide= a to have a testcase per device (physical or virtual) per algo?=C2=A0https://doc.dpdk.org/guides-25.11/cryptod= evs/overview.html#supported-aead-algorithms

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 The idea as of currently = was to go through every run of the cryptodev application that I saw in old = DTS and make a test case per run of the app. The openssl test case was for = development and can be ignored, which I failed to note in my submission. Th= ere are runs for virtual devices that I plan to include within this testsui= te by the end of it and each will have its own test case.
=C2=A0
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 @func_test
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 def a_wrong_devtype(self) -> None:
<= br>
Can you explain the=C2=A0name of this test and its purpose?
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 The last 3 test cases can be ignored as I made them for debuggin= g purposes in development. I simply forgot to=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 remove them prior to my submission.
=C2=A0
--00000000000000d5920647e2ec86--