From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E17C8A2F6B for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 09:21:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E2D1BFEE; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 09:21:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com (mail-io1-f65.google.com [209.85.166.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A69101BFE8 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 09:21:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id a1so34369703ioc.6 for ; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 00:21:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bJzeQJSNSbekMGoRyDEhmmhnr7ibMDDZRl8YaFftES0=; b=gRU7jwVwDGMOQQBeZJb8aEVSEwnIEerypiy7Xz9+Esvr3opS/vI3851IGQX29uT1G2 xegZ5sHXqW8psfT/OZivpOEA5dd5Mh3NGdmoJ3YtcTTO6tzHFLhZIT8cW026OTNhAzCy 5psgYutG5f+nrGCXS3uFodNhlAwJ/5gcuWLEKIHZL2dIccJU1AkwgNpM7peD2H3siJum aFpLQzKHoWzPnBRknWbkK2fIV/bopMGxRBfv4374vM1lRyGE0RQ55br1IUVjbi9v+AfQ s67t1I4mcI7acnYwngVyFS4a9K8xKXu3fVH3le9/IeJZOi841zBm/aWNh4/Z06+Tfp++ R9sQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bJzeQJSNSbekMGoRyDEhmmhnr7ibMDDZRl8YaFftES0=; b=GtY//WiSuRHf/qzeQSwSd8frWxQoU1topA/nAOmqVImzurXN6RxS1IiM29ZSMfS9Xz Yd1JcHhQZ+mvNpmJeKZCvkD6S5o/D7PIXaJALbkjglHdfPxFCxR1jlGckq4N40S5ChRq +UnphZj1490NoR5T2n5YJWAevLCNEtlR1hqRH2Y6R4TmCISLiMb8IlPXbNc5Hn/kdUwF oWmD5qzZydf0GsYN5q7mI1Z8aeo+/jA/NFry++f4h+qj08eb+u2fSRKPENYFiTxNaSSI DpfoAbm776UEDmjmHfHNHZrrISgPEUbdlZolINZLnBjcP1fnHZi8R1vEryQNSfvooCmn mNVg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWYjx5/MWrIfTe7iHq4md950YEimJfRYkrwR8tB5XP3ND3JDCfB vo7NtP7mJ3rOEY6irtEvDqbo38QzRx0F9rmjDEk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyt9IlghFX78G2rjYmizd7Y1jlHuOA8GYfgeZJh1ziqLXkJEJMtkpVqA4op1mumujLEBdWy22rjQCAZ8GawXb8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:3d4:: with SMTP id r20mr27113716jaq.104.1570519285626; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 00:21:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191003225732.13463-1-dharmik.thakkar@arm.com> <22790115.aVAZyMIHDd@xps> In-Reply-To: From: Jerin Jacob Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:48:56 +0530 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Jerin Jacob , Dharmik Thakkar , Akhil Goyal , Hemant Agrawal , anoobj@marvell.com, pathreya@marvell.com, Bruce Richardson , dpdk-dev , Honnappa Nagarahalli Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] crypto/armv8: enable meson build X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Mon, 7 Oct, 2019, 3:49 PM Jerin Jacob, wrote: > > > On Sun, 6 Oct, 2019, 11:36 PM Thomas Monjalon, > wrote: > >> 05/10/2019 17:28, Jerin Jacob: >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 4:27 AM Dharmik Thakkar >> wrote: >> > > >> > > Add new meson.build file for crypto/armv8 >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Dharmik Thakkar >> > > --- >> > > drivers/crypto/armv8/meson.build | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > > drivers/crypto/meson.build | 6 +++--- >> > > meson_options.txt | 2 ++ >> > > 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> > > create mode 100644 drivers/crypto/armv8/meson.build >> > >> > > >> > > option('allow_invalid_socket_id', type: 'boolean', value: false, >> > > description: 'allow out-of-range NUMA socket id\'s for >> platforms that don\'t report the value correctly') >> > > +option('armv8_crypto_dir', type: 'string', value: '', >> > > + description: 'path to the armv8_crypto library installation >> directory') >> >> You should not need such option if you provide a pkg-config file >> in your library. >> >> >> > It is not specific to this patch but it is connected to this patch. >> > >> > Three years back when Cavium contributed to this driver the situation >> > was different where only Cavium was contributing to DPDK and now we >> > have multiple vendors from >> > ARMv8 platform and ARM itself is contributing it. >> > >> > When it is submitted, I was not in favor of the external library. But >> > various reasons it happened to be the external library where 90% meat >> > in this library and shim PMD >> > the driver moved to DPDK. >> > >> > Now, I look back, It does not make sense to the external library. >> Reasons are >> > - It won't allow another ARMv8 player to contribute to this library as >> > Marvell owns this repo and there is no upstreaming path to this >> > library. >> >> This is a real issue and you are able to fix it. >> > > Note sure how I can fix it and why I need to fix it. I just dont want to > start a parallel collaborating infrastructure for DPDK armv8. > > >> >> > - That made this library to not have 'any' change for the last three >> > year and everyone have there owned copy of this driver. In fact the >> > library was not compiling for last 2.5 years. >> > - AES-NI case it makes sense to have an external library as it is a >> > single vendor and it is not specific to DPDK. But in this, It is >> > another way around >> >> I don't see how it is different, except it is badly maintained. >> > > It is different because only one company contributing to it. In this case, > multiple companies needs to contribute. > > The library badly maintained in upstream as there is no incentives to > upstream to external library. I believe each vendor has it own copy of > that. At least Some teams in Marvell internally has copy of it. > What is their incentive to upstream? They ask me the same thing. > > >> >> > - If it an external library, we might as well add the PMD code as well >> > there and that only 10% of the real stuff. >> > We are not able able to improve anything in this library due to this >> situation. >> > >> > Does anyone care about this PMD? If not, we might as well remove this >> > DPDK and every vendor can manage the external library and external >> > PMD(Situation won't change much) >> >> External PMD is bad. >> > > It is SHIM layer. I would say external library also bad if it is specific > to DPDK. > > I think this library should not be specific to DPDK, >> > > Sadly it is VERY specific to DPDK for doing authentication and encryption > in one shot to improve the performance. Openssl has already has armv8 > instructions support for doing it as two pass just that performance is not > good. For use cae such as IPsec it make sense do authentication and > encryption in one shot for performance improvement. > > so it would make sense as an external library > > > If it an external library, it does NOT make much sense for Marvell to > maintain it(No incentive and it is pain due lack of collaboration) > > Either someone need to step up and maintain it if we NOT choose to make it > as external else we can remove the PMD from dpdk(Makes life easy for > everyone). I don't want to maintain something not upsteamble nor > collaboration friendly aka less quality. > > . >> >> >> >> >> > Thoughts from ARM, other ARMv8 vendors or community? >> > I have expressed my concerns. If there is no constructive feedback to fix the concern. I will plan for submitting a patch to remove the shim crypto Armv8 PMD from dpdk by next week. >> >> >>