From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D13934660D; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 16:58:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 986E34025E; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 16:58:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-lj1-f173.google.com (mail-lj1-f173.google.com [209.85.208.173]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2ACE400D5 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 16:58:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lj1-f173.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-30db1bd3bebso64893241fa.2 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 07:58:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1745420310; x=1746025110; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=n4cNP4uhJUJ9nGislcnvn799FjUxPAv3N30DzQiPsW4=; b=Gpay+2ZyECdLyB1DdTc33h87iLlOTQDix4eczJqfdlsMHPBx74oejk1tAkedf6grXu p2x7Ma5u5cQfFtqIXIdNib3NL2jABSYwkSBTvzBWCIqezmZn6bQTmvVB4RtNLLK8jEF4 Vp+viUAYz/bl0b+pvPu0kFC7V0p2RILZ2gUaA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1745420310; x=1746025110; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=n4cNP4uhJUJ9nGislcnvn799FjUxPAv3N30DzQiPsW4=; b=SXs4+QoJ8KstjzIopyAi6mD0JrH+hQTkmajNvUDZ2J2q6wNPx8kpwO7Pz/cHuUswfU YPr15tK2ZXu13ZiBLAofYIzdFiz748rCz67TKasAVLbA8A6yxl2Dlgr/xAe1gHButMYR B6E3lC68a7Bs0p3E1F9fG6OD6BzFe9Sr2GPUxMEi/qGfSvGiULRZf/+sFzCZ5Zcii20A EdXHU/V/4NazydZTjDOGzrmyPBSebqgBWUULe26HHTDn33Z4Q4yROH8hRlWqyQOI9y66 n6Jd6TcvE6akjVKoleE9EQCq7ELOJqh5mVAhyAgmenC//d+IDyiA8RfMXJwqpIbYbwEf 5/kQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWNEDREB5Gbj573E4+0urti+jU66YwAHQlR2ssT+EZ38b5jVnofD9KFagZ91xizZxXikw==@dpdk.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy4B//ySZV+Rmovv3olcAPHbi9hi9X3uL8iKs8Z87UhSAIIr0Zh 08u3sqMgAAqxsNP3eDA2vaG0o3X3mTgRYmUIMNEefEvw4M6fyV77DpvBOtSdhmaGLKs5+iEY4JX I+zH3Pvn1hkXYa+cp3/k32kQdkLx0Pp1hGK8T0A== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncv+q3EZhpbHavfX1TUN9E6uaafiIUqldvcD/uBOpwUBIu+CqrQqJj3jX1iejXG ziAXo9L663UkNv7RgVLXioPJ6vlo3wt/wGoRIl1fc752/yjIX+Rnoedl9K2ucWQj3RlUQFRXziQ dgReH2MlJQSfNZhKlYOuCIuGP8DOerzpiVb4u1hDYbW4xlvlIVPjYBQfeX X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGSAqGCpV8D99nseHieXay4kmrKXREyEgiGxnC7kAHf7HLJnd6sqC3kcTKpllXVlAicE6+gsQKc8UwgRgPWOLs= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:ab0c:0:b0:310:81a0:64f7 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-31090502f08mr58597141fa.24.1745420310193; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 07:58:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Cody Cheng Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 10:58:13 -0400 X-Gm-Features: ATxdqUFZTFKLbndwDtEbXqEWRpNDXydoiMf5klxHZBYOedOY00cEXkqr2IxhoNU Message-ID: Subject: Re: Intel QuickAssist crypto operations testing To: "Mcnamara, John" Cc: Patrick Robb , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Ji, Kai" , Dean Marx , Adam Hassick , Nicholas Pratte , "ci@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org Hi Kai, I am reaching out to you regarding our efforts to set up a new QAT device at the DPDK Community Lab. This is for adding a new QAT Device, beyond the QAT PCI card that we set up and began testing last year for an ARM Ampere System. I've set up testing for the Intel QAT 4xxx series device, but I just wanted to double-check that the performance metrics we are seeing from DPDK's test-crypto-perf application look acceptable to you. We are running a DTS testsuite which uses the dpdk-test-crypto-perf application in throughput, latency, and verify mode for testing. If you want to see the test plan, you can read it here: https://git.dpdk.org/tools/dts/tree/test_plans/crypto_perf_cryptodev_perf_t= est_plan.rst Could you review the test results and let me know if they seem correct for this QAT SKU? Here are the test results. The metrics you are looking for should be visible in the perf_cryptodev_result.json file: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PfFziVYrD_Z2HQfXprty2lLNq5YX1Y7Y Thanks, Cody Cheng On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 2:36=E2=80=AFPM Mcnamara, John wrote: > > Hi, > > > > You can bounce the numbers, or any questions, off Kai Ji (added). > > > > John > > > > > > From: Patrick Robb > Sent: Tuesday, April 8, 2025 6:03 PM > To: Richardson, Bruce > Cc: Cody Cheng ; Dean Marx ; Adam = Hassick ; Nicholas Pratte ; ci@d= pdk.org > Subject: Intel QuickAssist crypto operations testing > > > > Hi Bruce, > > > > Do you remember last year when we had a tech board call about the server = refresh at UNH-IOL, you recommended that for the Intel processor DUT system= , we get a processor SKU which includes a QAT device? We did this, and the = SKU we selected was Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 5415+. > > > > Those devices are QAT 4xxx series QAT 4942 as reported by dpdk-devbind.py= --status: > > > > Crypto devices using kernel driver > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > 0000:76:00.0 '4xxx Series QAT 4942' numa_node=3D0 drv=3D4xxx unused=3Dqat= _4xxx,vfio-pci > 0000:f3:00.0 '4xxx Series QAT 4942' numa_node=3D1 drv=3D4xxx unused=3Dqat= _4xxx,vfio-pci > > > > Cody has been setting up the testing for this QAT device, which is done v= ia DPDK's test-crypto-perf application. He is satisfied with the metrics th= e card is getting with DPDK (he compared them against some reports Intel ha= s published and also what we see on a QAT PCI card on an Ampere ARM system = here at UNH). > > > > So, he thinks we are ready to go online. However, in order to be careful,= we were wondering if we should run the information we have by an Intel con= tact first. Is there any DPDK/quickassist/crypto person on your team who co= uld serve as a contact for this purpose? If so, I think Cody can add them t= o this thread and share the more detailed info for that person for them to = approve (or disapprove). > > > > Thanks let me know! > > > > -Patrick > > > >