Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/crypto: change cipher offset for esn vector

[Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>]

Hi Akhil,

Did you get a chance to look at my comments?

Thanks,
Anoob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Anoob Joseph
> Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2020 3:21 PM
> To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; Ankur Dwivedi
> <adwivedi@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: declan.doherty@intel.com; Hemant Agrawal
> <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>; Vakul Garg <vakul.garg@nxp.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/crypto: change cipher offset for esn
> vector
> 
> Hi Akhil,
> 
> Please see inline.
> 
> Thanks,
> Anoob
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2020 12:51 AM
> > To: Ankur Dwivedi <adwivedi@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: declan.doherty@intel.com; Hemant Agrawal
> <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>;
> > Vakul Garg <vakul.garg@nxp.com>; Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>
> > Subject: [EXT] RE: [PATCH] test/crypto: change cipher offset for esn
> > vector
> >
> > External Email
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > > >> >Why do we need this change?
> > > >> >The existing test case is to demonstrate a generic case where we
> > > >> >can have an auth only trailer as well. It is similar to a case
> > > >> >of IPSEC ESN but not exactly IPSec. Cipher offset can be
> > > >> >anything as per the app
> > > >requirement.
> > > >> >I don't think there is anything wrong in the vector. It should
> > > >> >pass in every hardware without any issue.
> > > >> [Ankur] It's a limitation in OCTEON TX PMDs that the (encr offset
> > > >> - auth offset) should be 8 bytes aligned.
> > > >> In the IPSEC ESN scenario generally the offsets will be such.
> > > >> But in the above IPSEC ESN test vector, this requirement is not
> > > >> met and hence the associated test cases fails on the PMD.
> > > >
> > > >In that case, I think it is better to have a separate test vector
> > > >and both should be executed. With the previous one as not supported
> > > >in your case and this one will be supported.
> > > [Ankur] The offsets values are present per crypto operation. So to
> > > make these tests as unsupported the pmd datapath needs to be
> changed.
> > > Is there an alternative to make these tests unsupported?
> >
> > I believe this is a data path error and a limitation in your PMD.
> > You can not stop the application writer from using unaligned cipher
> > offsets(non-8 byte aligned)
> 
> [Anoob] Yes. But the typical case with IPsec is what is supported in the PMD.
> 
> >
> > This is just a test application, which may hide your PMD limitation by
> > accepting this patch But in actual the scenario will fail when some
> > user configures a 12B cipher offset.
> 
> [Anoob] Agreed. But autotest having a failure is not an ideal situation to be it.
> Especially when it's not the typical usage. Can I propose to add a field like
> "Know Issues:" in the summary field? We can add a check for OCTEONTX
> PMDs in the test case and mark it as a known case. I do understand that the
> vision was to remove all driver specific tests and have generic tests for all
> PMDs, but here we are left with no other option. Chances are, other PMDs
> also could have similar limitations when moving to generic framework.
> 
> If you have suggestions to skip this test in any other way, that would also
> work for us.
> 
> > IMO, you should add a new test vector instead of replacing this one
> > and it should Be OK to have the existing one fail in your case.
> >