RE: RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific

["Kundapura, Ganapati" <ganapati.kundapura@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5485 bytes --]

Hi Akhil,
    No changes in sequence of API's by adding 'uint8_t impl_opaque' to 'struct rte_crypto_op'.
It's required in case application/event dispatcher passes some implementation specific value in rte_event::impl_opaque, to restore the value
back on to rte_event::impl_opaque after enqueue to and dequeue from cryptodev.

Here is the pseudocode for one of the use case
Application/event dispatcher passes implementation specific value in rte_event::impl_opaque.
struct rte_event ev;
rte_event_dequeue_burst(..., &ev, ...)
struct rte_crypto_op *crypto_op = ev.event_ptr;   // ev.impl_opaque some implementation specific value
rte_cryptodev_enqueue_burst(..., crypto_op, ...) ; // ev.impl_opaque is not passed to crypto_op

With rte_crypto_op::impl_opaque field which is unchanged in library/driver
crypto_op->impl_opaque = ev.impl_opaque;
rte_cryptodev_enqueue_burst(..., crypto_op, ...) ;

...
rte_crypto_dequeue_burst(..., crypto_op, ...)
ev.event_ptr = crypto_op;
...
rte_event_enqueue_burst(..., &ev, ...);  // ev::impl_opaque value is lost

with rte_crypto_op::impl_opaque field
ev.event_ptr = crypto_op;
ev.impl_opaque = crypto_op->impl_opaque; // implementation specific value in rte_event::impl_opaque restored back
rte_event_enqueue_burst(..., &ev, ...);

Thanks,
Ganapati


From: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 10:18 PM
To: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundapura@intel.com>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; fanzhang.oss@gmail.com; Ji, Kai <kai.ji@intel.com>; Power, Ciara <ciara.power@intel.com>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S <abhinandan.gujjar@intel.com>; Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheerthan@intel.com>; Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific

Hi Ganapati,

Can you please explain the flow with a sequence of APIs to be used.

Regards,
Akhil

From: Kundapura, Ganapati <ganapati.kundapura@intel.com<mailto:ganapati.kundapura@intel.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 12:44 PM
To: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org<mailto:dev@dpdk.org>>; Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com<mailto:gakhil@marvell.com>>; fanzhang.oss@gmail.com<mailto:fanzhang.oss@gmail.com>; Ji, Kai <kai.ji@intel.com<mailto:kai.ji@intel.com>>; Power, Ciara <ciara.power@intel.com<mailto:ciara.power@intel.com>>; Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com<mailto:arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>>; Gujjar, Abhinandan S <abhinandan.gujjar@intel.com<mailto:abhinandan.gujjar@intel.com>>; Jayatheerthan, Jay <jay.jayatheerthan@intel.com<mailto:jay.jayatheerthan@intel.com>>; Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com<mailto:jerinjacobk@gmail.com>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RFC: Using and renaming 8-bit reserved field of rte_crypto_op for implementation specific

Prioritize security for external emails: Confirm sender and content safety before clicking links or opening attachments
________________________________
Hi dpdk-dev,
   Can 'uint8_t reserved[1]' of 'struct rte_crypto_op' be renamed
to 'uint8_t impl_opaque' for implementation specific?

An implementation may use this field to hold implementation specific
value to share value between dequeue and enqueue operation and crypto library/driver
can also use this field to share implementation specfic value to event crypto adapter/application.

'struct rte_event' has 'uint8_t impl_opaque' member
struct rte_event {
                ...
                uint8_t impl_opaque;
                /**< Implementation specific opaque value.
                * An implementation may use this field to hold
                * implementation specific value to share between
                * dequeue and enqueue operation.
                * The application should not modify this field.
                */
                ...
};

Event crypto adapter, on dequeuing the event, enqueues rte_event::event_ptr
to cryptodev as rte_crypto_op and converts the dequeued crypto op to rte_event
without restoring the implementation specific opaque value.

By having the 'uint8_t impl_opaque' member in 'struct rte_crypto_op' as
diff --git a/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h b/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h
index dbc2700..af46ec9 100644
--- a/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h
+++ b/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto.h
@@ -146,10 +146,13 @@ struct rte_crypto_op {
                                /**< TLS record */
                        } param1;
                        /**< Additional per operation parameter 1. */
-                       uint8_t reserved[1];
-                       /**< Reserved bytes to fill 64 bits for
-                        * future additions
+                       uint8_t impl_opaque;
+                       /**< Implementation specific opaque value.
+                        * An implementation may use this field to hold
+                        * implementation specific value to share between
+                        * dequeue and enqueue operation.
                         */
+

which is untouched in library/driver and rte_event::impl_opaque field can be restored
while enqueuing the event back to eventdev.

Also crypto library/driver can use rte_crypto_op::impl_opaque field to
share implementation specific opaque value to the event crypto adapter/application.

I look forward to feedback on this proposal. Patch will be submitted
for review once the initial feedback is received.

Thank you,
Ganapati

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 14261 bytes --]