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 B9717A2EEB for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:21:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96B6F2BCE; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:21:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f67.google.com (mail-io1-f67.google.com [209.85.166.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552E81B203 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:21:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f67.google.com with SMTP id q1so27371155ion.1 for ; Mon, 07 Oct 2019 03:21:14 -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=TAVbeHtQzL9ddcAKpArg6bTYGwlTnBLnvhCoeuV3qfY=; b=OCwlwu6TE6eGbSIqyXMi3jp00aMOZvmyGcwN4f21VmgFB/0N1DJZ8Og64PFr98IvkN o6Z81mEeEVy9UOAKeZQNsxtAUoe0G8o6kVUpVoij9aI6GrnJTKCgVJ6A7GBm/p9m5Xqo 0H6sP2eMsZGaHeRpMwDxaznlCQ03X1t8RJaWrO8H/u0ATYe8BwElpSrmRSBkCEVkUqnj VmVVeVmO/3PTjCjaJYl9dsNU7VgA4KuMVKFE9JPvY4uwXix2xE/8mNwKoCoaqiBl0alm MmqH0E4jE7v1TG+vl0u5/1BYT911G93BowFnJvxOMbJRnOmJCbTkSSp6ymFr5n/qcb3R EMpQ== 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=TAVbeHtQzL9ddcAKpArg6bTYGwlTnBLnvhCoeuV3qfY=; b=NAGHln3i1+FYT/JiobcYJ4s1yZg/QJ/+Dk4jCTIR0tITAF2TDWSElEEUvxRLMg5OQ3 O3P9Px18p46uqnJ9ofzuCPKGQJ282mG82htg3C2hwxsjT9Q5DdT8w9NNdXC+GBcUioj3 ceRNhcZe/f2wySpLc9OtPULStdBXCBbGx+FZqsoMOECEZEibEqnFCQm2MO+dkmGGllVI rDUzQMaiGTtC+nWF0Ws4wdOawKM+oUueExfSb246DDztb6kbeHTcO1ct9wkB8V5IfuP4 CEA89aa2row/CyVxPCNuvRgSgvzsqHnh+B1PqeUkK279q5SHZmo56k7CGVRP89lEck+j f0qw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXSkYlm04QfDvUO6WT5OqrCj2Bioa6G8XYu7kNidbnycNkSQOVg 4XnMpzXKjpS7gIlSztyvLW6lPmuwApeoPyObA74= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqywFx1vMXjWckcEhy0AvWvvGjuPU3EEnr/RxAJ0VN5tZSutvMIAuPssudsAwSwqmtC2181zpvXh91/jMJXE9Bc= X-Received: by 2002:a92:1598:: with SMTP id 24mr27362021ilv.60.1570443673414; Mon, 07 Oct 2019 03:21:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191003225732.13463-1-dharmik.thakkar@arm.com> <22790115.aVAZyMIHDd@xps> In-Reply-To: <22790115.aVAZyMIHDd@xps> From: Jerin Jacob Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 15:49:56 +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 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? > > > >