DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
To: Anoob Joseph <anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>,
	Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
	Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau@intel.com>,
	Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>,
	Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
	Narayana Prasad <narayanaprasad.athreya@caviumnetworks.com>,
	dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add support for inline protocol
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:35:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171215133523.jvoccqcnlnnhpktu@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <923257f6-4ddf-6885-f7ad-caf5926a0545@caviumnetworks.com>

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 04:33:25PM +0530, Anoob Joseph wrote:
> Hi Nelio,
> 
> 
> On 12/15/2017 03:09 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote:
> > Hi Anoob,
> > 
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:43:16AM +0000, Anoob Joseph wrote:
> > > Adding support for inline protocol processing
> > > 
> > > In ingress side, application will receive regular IP packets, without
> > > any IPsec related info. Application will do a selector check (SP-SA
> > > check) by making use of the metadata from the packet. The
> > > device-specific metadata in mbuf would aid in determing the security
> > > session which processed the packet.
> > This means that your devices removes the tunnel header?  What happens
> > for packets which could not be decrypted correctly, is also the header
> > removed?
> > Anyway this description is wrong as it is not true for all inline
> > devices.
> This is particularly for inline protocol processed packets. For inline
> crypto, tunnel headers will be present, but for inline protocol tunnel
> headers need not be present.

Ok, my bad, I did not see the RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL
additional flag.

Sorry,

> > In addition, in ingress, the same result can be archived by using a mark
> > id to identify the flow and thus its security association.
> > 
> > > In egress side, the plain packet would be submitted to the driver. The
> > > packet will have optional metadata, which could be used to identify the
> > > security session associated with the packet.
> > Not true for all inline devices, some only need the next-proto for the
> > ESP part.
> This is more or less existing behavior for inline crypto. Inline protocol
> shares most of it's behavior with inline crypto.
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Anoob Joseph <anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com>
> > > ---
> > > v5:
> > > * Fixed checkpatch reported warnings
> > > 
> > > v4:
> > > * Directly using rte_mbuf.udata64 as the metadata from the packet
> > > * Removed usage of rte_security_get_pkt_metadata API
> > > 
> > > v3:
> > > * Using (void *)userdata instead of 64 bit metadata in conf
> > > * Changes parallel to the change in API
> > > 
> > > v2:
> > > * Using get_pkt_metadata API instead of get_session & get_cookie APIs
> > > 
> > >   examples/ipsec-secgw/esp.c         |   6 +-
> > >   examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c |  42 ++++++++++++-
> > >   examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c       | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > >   3 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/esp.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/esp.c
> > > index c3efe52..561f873 100644
> > > --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/esp.c
> > > +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/esp.c
> > > @@ -178,7 +178,8 @@ esp_inbound_post(struct rte_mbuf *m, struct ipsec_sa *sa,
> > >   	RTE_ASSERT(sa != NULL);
> > >   	RTE_ASSERT(cop != NULL);
> > > -	if (sa->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO) {
> > > +	if ((sa->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL) ||
> > > +			(sa->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO)) {
> > >   		if (m->ol_flags & PKT_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
> > >   			if (m->ol_flags & PKT_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD_FAILED)
> > >   				cop->status = RTE_CRYPTO_OP_STATUS_ERROR;
> > > @@ -474,7 +475,8 @@ esp_outbound_post(struct rte_mbuf *m,
> > >   	RTE_ASSERT(m != NULL);
> > >   	RTE_ASSERT(sa != NULL);
> > > -	if (sa->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO) {
> > > +	if ((sa->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL) ||
> > > +			(sa->type == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO)) {
> > >   		m->ol_flags |= PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD;
> > >   	} else {
> > >   		RTE_ASSERT(cop != NULL);
> > > diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
> > > index c98454a..8254056 100644
> > > --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
> > > +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
> > > @@ -265,6 +265,40 @@ prepare_one_packet(struct rte_mbuf *pkt, struct ipsec_traffic *t)
> > >   		RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC, "Unsupported packet type\n");
> > >   		rte_pktmbuf_free(pkt);
> > >   	}
> > > +
> > > +	/* Check if the packet has been processed inline. For inline protocol
> > > +	 * processed packets, the metadata in the mbuf can be used to identify
> > > +	 * the security processing done on the packet. The metadata will be
> > > +	 * used to retrieve the application registered userdata associated
> > > +	 * with the security session.
> > > +	 */
> > > +
> > > +	if (pkt->ol_flags & PKT_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
> > > +		struct ipsec_sa *sa;
> > > +		struct ipsec_mbuf_metadata *priv;
> > > +		struct rte_security_ctx *ctx = (struct rte_security_ctx *)
> > > +						rte_eth_dev_get_sec_ctx(
> > > +						pkt->port);
> > > +
> > > +		/* Retrieve the userdata registered. Here, the userdata
> > > +		 * registered is the SA pointer.
> > > +		 */
> > > +
> > > +		sa = (struct ipsec_sa *)
> > > +				rte_security_get_userdata(ctx, pkt->udata64);
> > > +
> > > +		if (sa == NULL) {
> > > +			/* userdata could not be retrieved */
> > > +			return;
> > > +		}
> > > +
> > > +		/* Save SA as priv member in mbuf. This will be used in the
> > > +		 * IPsec selector(SP-SA) check.
> > > +		 */
> > > +
> > > +		priv = get_priv(pkt);
> > > +		priv->sa = sa;
> > > +	}
> > You must verify the function exists on all drivers, those who don't
> > support such userdata to be inserted won't implement it.
> That check is there in library. It will return NULL and then the function
> would exit
> > 
> > What happens on security session where the application don't set such
> > information?  How the application knows the pointer is set correctly?
> Application is the one who sets and gets the pointer. If application doesn't
> set it correctly, application will not able to use it. If application
> doesn't set this, for inline protocol, the application won't have any
> information which it can use to identify the security processing done.
> > 
> > >   }
> > >   static inline void
> > > @@ -401,11 +435,17 @@ inbound_sp_sa(struct sp_ctx *sp, struct sa_ctx *sa, struct traffic_type *ip,
> > >   			ip->pkts[j++] = m;
> > >   			continue;
> > >   		}
> > > -		if (res & DISCARD || i < lim) {
> > > +		if (res & DISCARD) {
> > >   			rte_pktmbuf_free(m);
> > >   			continue;
> > >   		}
> > > +
> > >   		/* Only check SPI match for processed IPSec packets */
> > > +		if (i < lim && ((m->ol_flags & PKT_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD) == 0)) {
> > > +			rte_pktmbuf_free(m);
> > > +			continue;
> > > +		}
> > > +
> > >   		sa_idx = ip->res[i] & PROTECT_MASK;
> > >   		if (sa_idx == 0 || !inbound_sa_check(sa, m, sa_idx)) {
> > >   			rte_pktmbuf_free(m);
> > > diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c
> > > index 70ed227..bd68ec6 100644
> > > --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c
> > > +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c
> > > @@ -46,6 +46,27 @@
> > >   #include "ipsec.h"
> > >   #include "esp.h"
> > > +static inline void
> > > +set_ipsec_conf(struct ipsec_sa *sa, struct rte_security_ipsec_xform *ipsec)
> > > +{
> > > +	if (ipsec->mode == RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_MODE_TUNNEL) {
> > > +		struct rte_security_ipsec_tunnel_param *tunnel =
> > > +				&ipsec->tunnel;
> > > +		if (sa->flags == IP4_TUNNEL) {
> > > +			tunnel->type =
> > > +				RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_TUNNEL_IPV4;
> > > +			tunnel->ipv4.ttl = IPDEFTTL;
> > > +
> > > +			memcpy((uint8_t *)&tunnel->ipv4.src_ip,
> > > +				(uint8_t *)&sa->src.ip.ip4, 4);
> > > +
> > > +			memcpy((uint8_t *)&tunnel->ipv4.dst_ip,
> > > +				(uint8_t *)&sa->dst.ip.ip4, 4);
> > > +		}
> > > +		/* TODO support for Transport and IPV6 tunnel */
> > > +	}
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >   static inline int
> > >   create_session(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx, struct ipsec_sa *sa)
> > >   {
> > > @@ -95,7 +116,8 @@ create_session(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx, struct ipsec_sa *sa)
> > >   					RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_MODE_TUNNEL :
> > >   					RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_MODE_TRANSPORT,
> > >   			} },
> > > -			.crypto_xform = sa->xforms
> > > +			.crypto_xform = sa->xforms,
> > > +			.userdata = NULL,
> > >   		};
> > > @@ -104,23 +126,8 @@ create_session(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx, struct ipsec_sa *sa)
> > >   							rte_cryptodev_get_sec_ctx(
> > >   							ipsec_ctx->tbl[cdev_id_qp].id);
> > > -			if (sess_conf.ipsec.mode ==
> > > -					RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_MODE_TUNNEL) {
> > > -				struct rte_security_ipsec_tunnel_param *tunnel =
> > > -						&sess_conf.ipsec.tunnel;
> > > -				if (sa->flags == IP4_TUNNEL) {
> > > -					tunnel->type =
> > > -						RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_TUNNEL_IPV4;
> > > -					tunnel->ipv4.ttl = IPDEFTTL;
> > > -
> > > -					memcpy((uint8_t *)&tunnel->ipv4.src_ip,
> > > -						(uint8_t *)&sa->src.ip.ip4, 4);
> > > -
> > > -					memcpy((uint8_t *)&tunnel->ipv4.dst_ip,
> > > -						(uint8_t *)&sa->dst.ip.ip4, 4);
> > > -				}
> > > -				/* TODO support for Transport and IPV6 tunnel */
> > > -			}
> > > +			/* Set IPsec parameters in conf */
> > > +			set_ipsec_conf(sa, &(sess_conf.ipsec));
> > >   			sa->sec_session = rte_security_session_create(ctx,
> > >   					&sess_conf, ipsec_ctx->session_pool);
> > > @@ -206,6 +213,70 @@ create_session(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx, struct ipsec_sa *sa)
> > >   					err.message);
> > >   				return -1;
> > >   			}
> > > +		} else if (sa->type ==
> > > +				RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL) {
> > > +			struct rte_security_ctx *ctx =
> > > +					(struct rte_security_ctx *)
> > > +					rte_eth_dev_get_sec_ctx(sa->portid);
> > > +			const struct rte_security_capability *sec_cap;
> > > +
> > > +			if (ctx == NULL) {
> > > +				RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC,
> > > +				"Ethernet device doesn't have security features registered\n");
> > > +				return -1;
> > > +			}
> > > +
> > > +			/* Set IPsec parameters in conf */
> > > +			set_ipsec_conf(sa, &(sess_conf.ipsec));
> > > +
> > > +			/* Save SA as userdata for the security session. When
> > > +			 * the packet is received, this userdata will be
> > > +			 * retrieved using the metadata from the packet.
> > > +			 *
> > > +			 * This is required only for inbound SAs.
> > > +			 */
> > Again not true for all inline devices.
> Should be valid for all inline protocol devices. May be addition of
> capability would look better?
> > 
> > > +
> > > +			if (sa->direction == RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_DIR_INGRESS)
> > > +				sess_conf.userdata = (void *) sa;
> > > +
> > > +			sa->sec_session = rte_security_session_create(ctx,
> > > +					&sess_conf, ipsec_ctx->session_pool);
> > > +			if (sa->sec_session == NULL) {
> > > +				RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC,
> > > +				"SEC Session init failed: err: %d\n", ret);
> > > +				return -1;
> > > +			}
> > > +
> > > +			sec_cap = rte_security_capabilities_get(ctx);
> > > +
> > > +			if (sec_cap == NULL) {
> > > +				RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC,
> > > +				"No capabilities registered\n");
> > > +				return -1;
> > > +			}
> > > +
> > > +			/* iterate until ESP tunnel*/
> > > +			while (sec_cap->action !=
> > > +					RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_NONE) {
> > > +
> > > +				if (sec_cap->action == sa->type &&
> > > +				    sec_cap->protocol ==
> > > +					RTE_SECURITY_PROTOCOL_IPSEC &&
> > > +				    sec_cap->ipsec.mode ==
> > > +					RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_MODE_TUNNEL &&
> > > +				    sec_cap->ipsec.direction == sa->direction)
> > > +					break;
> > > +				sec_cap++;
> > > +			}
> > > +
> > > +			if (sec_cap->action == RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_NONE) {
> > > +				RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC,
> > > +				"No suitable security capability found\n");
> > > +				return -1;
> > > +			}
> > > +
> > > +			sa->ol_flags = sec_cap->ol_flags;
> > > +			sa->security_ctx = ctx;
> > >   		}
> > >   	} else {
> > >   		sa->crypto_session = rte_cryptodev_sym_session_create(
> > > @@ -323,7 +394,19 @@ ipsec_enqueue(ipsec_xform_fn xform_func, struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx,
> > >   			}
> > >   			break;
> > >   		case RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_PROTOCOL:
> > > -			break;
> > > +			if ((unlikely(sa->sec_session == NULL)) &&
> > > +					create_session(ipsec_ctx, sa)) {
> > > +				rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
> > > +				continue;
> > > +			}
> > > +
> > > +			cqp = &ipsec_ctx->tbl[sa->cdev_id_qp];
> > > +			cqp->ol_pkts[cqp->ol_pkts_cnt++] = pkts[i];
> > > +			if (sa->ol_flags & RTE_SECURITY_TX_OLOAD_NEED_MDATA)
> > > +				rte_security_set_pkt_metadata(
> > > +						sa->security_ctx,
> > > +						sa->sec_session, pkts[i], NULL);
> > > +			continue;
> > >   		case RTE_SECURITY_ACTION_TYPE_INLINE_CRYPTO:
> > >   			priv->cop.type = RTE_CRYPTO_OP_TYPE_SYMMETRIC;
> > >   			priv->cop.status = RTE_CRYPTO_OP_STATUS_NOT_PROCESSED;
> > > -- 
> > > 2.7.4
> > > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> Thanks,
> Anoob

-- 
Nélio Laranjeiro
6WIND

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-15 13:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-20 10:31 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] add inline protocol support Anoob Joseph
2017-11-20 10:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] lib/security: add support for saving app cookie Anoob Joseph
2017-11-20 12:12   ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-20 15:32     ` Anoob
2017-11-20 17:49       ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-20 19:09         ` Anoob Joseph
2017-11-21 10:15           ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-20 10:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add support for inline protocol Anoob Joseph
2017-11-22  6:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] add inline protocol support Anoob Joseph
2017-11-22  6:55   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] lib/security: add support for get metadata Anoob Joseph
2017-11-22 11:29     ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-22 11:52       ` Anoob
2017-11-22 12:12         ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-22 13:27     ` Neil Horman
2017-11-22 14:13       ` Anoob
2017-11-27 13:55         ` Neil Horman
2017-11-22  6:55   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add support for inline protocol Anoob Joseph
2017-11-22 12:21   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] add inline protocol support Nelio Laranjeiro
2017-11-22 12:55     ` Anoob
2017-11-22 13:05       ` Nelio Laranjeiro
2017-11-22 13:38         ` Anoob
2017-11-22 13:53           ` Anoob
2017-11-22 15:13         ` Anoob
2017-11-22 15:25           ` Nelio Laranjeiro
2017-11-23 11:19   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 " Anoob Joseph
2017-11-23 11:19     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] lib/security: add support for get metadata Anoob Joseph
2017-11-24  8:50       ` Akhil Goyal
2017-11-24  9:39         ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-24 10:55           ` Akhil Goyal
2017-11-24 11:17             ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-24 11:34               ` Akhil Goyal
2017-11-24 11:59                 ` Radu Nicolau
2017-11-24 12:03                   ` Akhil Goyal
2017-12-06  7:30                     ` Anoob
2017-12-06  9:43                       ` Radu Nicolau
2017-12-11  7:21                         ` Anoob
2017-12-12  8:55                           ` Akhil Goyal
2017-12-12 13:50                             ` Anoob Joseph
2017-12-13 14:38                               ` Akhil Goyal
2017-11-24 12:22                 ` Anoob
2017-11-29  5:43                   ` Anoob
2017-12-04  9:28                   ` Akhil Goyal
2017-12-04 10:16                     ` Anoob
2017-11-23 11:19     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add support for inline protocol Anoob Joseph
2017-12-11 11:02       ` Radu Nicolau
2017-12-15  8:30     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/2] add inline protocol support Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15  8:30       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/2] lib/security: add support for get userdata Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15  8:30       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add support for inline protocol Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15  8:43       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/2] add inline protocol support Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15  8:43         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/2] lib/security: add support for get userdata Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15 10:01           ` Akhil Goyal
2017-12-15 10:53             ` Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15 10:58               ` Akhil Goyal
2017-12-15  8:43         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add support for inline protocol Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15  9:39           ` Nelio Laranjeiro
2017-12-15 11:03             ` Anoob Joseph
2017-12-15 13:35               ` Nelio Laranjeiro [this message]
2017-12-15 10:04           ` Akhil Goyal
2017-12-15 11:16             ` Anoob Joseph
2017-12-18  7:15         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/2] add inline protocol support Anoob Joseph
2017-12-18  7:15           ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] lib/security: add support for get userdata Anoob Joseph
2017-12-18  7:34             ` Akhil Goyal
2017-12-18  7:15           ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add support for inline protocol Anoob Joseph
2018-01-08 16:10             ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2018-01-09  9:12             ` Akhil Goyal
2018-01-16 11:00             ` Nicolau, Radu
2018-01-09 16:05           ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/2] add inline protocol support De Lara Guarch, Pablo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20171215133523.jvoccqcnlnnhpktu@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com \
    --to=nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com \
    --cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
    --cc=anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=narayanaprasad.athreya@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=radu.nicolau@intel.com \
    --cc=sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).