From: "Kusztal, ArkadiuszX" <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>
To: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>,
Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda <kirankumark@marvell.com>
Cc: "Zhang, Roy Fan" <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>,
Umesh Kartha <ukartha@marvell.com>,
Ramkumar Balu <rbalu@marvell.com>
Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH 11/40] cryptodev: remove asym crypto next xform
Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 06:55:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB5013EA5F4AD0E14092FBCC769FD89@PH0PR11MB5013.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR11MB50136DC3303731DF139534BC9FD89@PH0PR11MB5013.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
> Sent: Friday, May 27, 2022 8:40 AM
> To: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>; Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>;
> dev@dpdk.org; Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda <kirankumark@marvell.com>
> Cc: Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>; Umesh Kartha
> <ukartha@marvell.com>; Ramkumar Balu <rbalu@marvell.com>
> Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH 11/40] cryptodev: remove asym crypto next xform
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
> > Sent: Friday, May 27, 2022 8:31 AM
> > To: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>; Akhil Goyal
> > <gakhil@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda
> > <kirankumark@marvell.com>
> > Cc: Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>; Umesh Kartha
> > <ukartha@marvell.com>; Ramkumar Balu <rbalu@marvell.com>
> > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH 11/40] cryptodev: remove asym crypto next
> > xform
> >
> > Hi Anoob,
> >
> > Sorry, I don't know how I have missed this email!
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 9:06 AM
> > > To: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>; Akhil Goyal
> > > <gakhil@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda
> > > <kirankumark@marvell.com>
> > > Cc: Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>; Umesh Kartha
> > > <ukartha@marvell.com>; Ramkumar Balu <rbalu@marvell.com>
> > > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH 11/40] cryptodev: remove asym crypto next
> > > xform
> > >
> > > Hi Arek, Akhil,
> > >
> > > Please see inline.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Anoob
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 12:06 PM
> > > > To: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Kiran Kumar
> > > > Kokkilagadda <kirankumark@marvell.com>; Anoob Joseph
> > > > <anoobj@marvell.com>
> > > > Cc: Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>
> > > > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH 11/40] cryptodev: remove asym crypto
> > > > next xform
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 8:06 AM
> > > > > To: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>;
> > > > > dev@dpdk.org; Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda
> > > > > <kirankumark@marvell.com>; Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>
> > > > > Cc: Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>
> > > > > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH 11/40] cryptodev: remove asym crypto
> > > > > next xform
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > - removed asymnetric crypto xform next field.
> > > > > > > > Rationale behind having chaining in symmetric crypto was a
> > > > > > > > fact that encryption and authentication are usually done
> > > > > > > > on the same set of data independent of algorithm.
> > > > > > > > HW usually will be able to handle it in one PCI call.
> > > > > > > > In asymmetric there is no such relation between
> > > > > > > > algorithms, therefore next field would be useless.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arek Kusztal <arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please check documentation
> > "doc/guides/prog_guide/cryptodev_lib.rst"
> > > > > > > Not all asymmetric crypto xforms are supported for chaining.
> > > > > > > Currently supported asymmetric crypto chaining is
> > > > > > > Diffie-Hellman private key generation followed by public generation.
> > > > > > [Arek] And why do chaining when this can be done even with one bit
> flag.
> > > > > >
> > > > > I believe it is OK to remove next. @Kiran Kumar
> > > > > Kokkilagadda/Anoob please confirm.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we are removing it, then documentation should be in sync.
> > > > [Arek] - although, we may keep it for now, I am not dropping it in v2.
> > > > DH priv + pub can be done with priv_key.len = 0 -> similar as 'k'
> > > > in ecdsa when k.data = NULL.
> > > > But I do not see any situation for now it will be useful, it may
> > > > be dropped later if not application found.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Also, currently API does not support chaining of
> > > > > > > symmetric and asymmetric crypto xforms.
> > > > > > [Arek] - This is one unlikely scenario to combine symmetric
> > > > > > and asymmetric. One I can think of was once proposed DH + DSA
> > > > > > integration for random number. But not much else, although we
> > > > > > can keep it around for a
> > > > > while.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes it is highly unlikely to use this combination.
> > >
> > > [Anoob] We may need this support when we add EdDSA support. That
> > > would involve a asymmetric operation after hash is generated (symmetric).
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EdDSA#Ed25519
> > >
> > > And, asymmetric chaining may become useful when we have PMDs capable
> > > of doing more operations together (like the case with EdDSA). So my
> > > preference would be to retain the 'next' field in asym crypto xform.
> > [Arek] - that is very good point, however to implement EdDSA as
> > chaining would mean that:
> > - we need to implement EdDSA internals in DPDK
> > - and EdDSA (in hash option, where actually picking hash would have
> > sense) is not one hash but multiple hash operation, so we would have
> > to had multiple chaining with operations in between
> > - and we would have to compute R and S separately.
> > - If PMD does not support one-pass EdDSA - well this is something that
> > should definitely discuss, but having any crypto internals in DPDK is
> > not probably an option?
> [Arek] - but, I have kept 'next' in later changes.
[Arek] - additionally if EdDSAhash one-pass used it is enough to have field with hash, an that's all - only information needed.
Normally EdDSA hash is fixed to SHA256 or BLAKE but for EdDSAhash option there is one additional hash - so enum in Ed struct should be enough.
> >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h | 2 --
> > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h
> > > > > > > > b/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h index
> > > > > > > > 1652a434a5..b355cbe5fa
> > > > > > > > 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h
> > > > > > > > +++ b/lib/cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h
> > > > > > > > @@ -492,8 +492,6 @@ struct rte_crypto_ecpm_op_param {
> > > > > > > > * Structure describing asym xforms.
> > > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > > struct rte_crypto_asym_xform {
> > > > > > > > - struct rte_crypto_asym_xform *next;
> > > > > > > > - /**< Pointer to next xform to set up xform chain.*/
> > > > > > > > enum rte_crypto_asym_xform_type xform_type;
> > > > > > > > /**< Asymmetric crypto transform */
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 2.13.6
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-27 6:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-20 5:54 [PATCH 00/40] cryptodev: rsa, dh, ecdh changes Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 01/40] cryptodev: redefine ec group enum Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 02/40] cryptodev: remove list end enumerators Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 7:19 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 03/40] test/crypto: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 04/40] cryptodev: reduce number of comments in asym xform Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 10:59 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 17:37 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 5:44 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 05/40] test/crypto: removed asym xform none Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 06/40] cryptodev: separate key exchange operation enum Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 11:45 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 07/40] crypto/openssl: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 08/40] test/crypto: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 7:18 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 09/40] cryptodev: remove unnecessary zero assignement Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 7:13 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 10/40] cryptodev: remove comment about using ephemeral key in dsa Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 11/40] cryptodev: remove asym crypto next xform Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 7:22 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 11:12 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 14:47 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 6:06 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-25 6:36 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 7:05 ` Anoob Joseph
2022-05-27 6:30 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-27 6:40 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-27 6:55 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX [this message]
2022-05-27 7:27 ` Anoob Joseph
2022-05-27 7:47 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 12/40] crypto/openssl: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 13/40] test/crypto: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 7:24 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 7:38 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 14/40] app/test-crypto-perf: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 15/40] app/test-eventdev: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 7:25 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 16/40] cryptodev: move dh type from xform to dh op Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 11:52 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 17/40] crypto/openssl: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 18/40] test/crypto: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 19/40] cryptodev: changed order of dh fields Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 20/40] cryptodev: add elliptic curve diffie hellman Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 12:08 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 14:52 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-24 14:55 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 6:02 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-25 6:33 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 21/40] cryptodev: add public key verify option Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 12:12 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 14:59 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 6:00 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-25 6:30 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 22/40] cryptodev: move RSA padding into separate struct Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 23/40] crypto/qat: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 24/40] crypto/openssl: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 25/40] crypto/octeontx: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 26/40] crypto/cnxk: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 27/40] common/cpt: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 28/40] test/crypto: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 29/40] cryptodev: add salt length and optional label Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 12:30 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 15:14 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 5:57 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 30/40] cryptodev: reduce rsa struct to only necessary fields Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 12:52 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 15:33 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 5:48 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 31/40] crypto/qat: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 32/40] crypto/openssl: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 33/40] crypto/octeontx: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 34/40] crypto/cnxk: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 35/40] common/cpt: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 36/40] test/crypto: " Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 37/40] cryptodev: add asym op flags Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 12:07 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 38/40] cryptodev: clarify usage of private key in dh Arek Kusztal
2022-05-24 12:56 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2022-05-24 14:30 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-25 6:09 ` Akhil Goyal
2022-05-25 6:37 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 39/40] crypto/openssl: generate dh private key Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 5:54 ` [PATCH 40/40] test/crypto: added test for dh priv key generation Arek Kusztal
2022-05-20 7:30 ` [EXT] [PATCH 00/40] cryptodev: rsa, dh, ecdh changes Akhil Goyal
2022-05-20 7:37 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
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=PH0PR11MB5013EA5F4AD0E14092FBCC769FD89@PH0PR11MB5013.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=arkadiuszx.kusztal@intel.com \
--cc=anoobj@marvell.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gakhil@marvell.com \
--cc=kirankumark@marvell.com \
--cc=rbalu@marvell.com \
--cc=roy.fan.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=ukartha@marvell.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).