From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C873CA057B; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:24:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02C51C244; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:24:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com (new1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.221]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21FD01C222 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:24:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81FD6580973; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 09:24:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 09:24:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=SomFUlT9Hy1peGfd4cMf48kmWeyjD+17NoE9Qc0SUxo=; b=Kpxbbj04Ud/W x/VkJX2UmuT/4F5B9qfrmSDqHnqGpHyDSfpuvGlgi2x2Ha3XD8csORZP8Llmh5jD TxNQ2sqKX5EI8U2ULPn+RIUD8Uz0DTW13KUAulHXPmjyv7Xx8ufQUGIBKi/CUUBn gbqztnexVwmyBkj06gUbCuEc88+lfiY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=SomFUlT9Hy1peGfd4cMf48kmWeyjD+17NoE9Qc0SU xo=; b=mXCe5cdwFJwSURqiZOF5HJCoB8PZfXdqrRk3WCaLApomDWlLnxW9dZmBa kBg5bJl9EvnfdjfKfaKjrpE+5JFJBb12NiB0QL3KpH/HXu2bcPqFzxSw08GjJEPl 5zcrx41WELu5vST6g52/1jsfOUkuo8JouZpLFEaetPKUa/1bArBFpj/eFZiOYTyl pzvX3nrPDRdeATNeKNCDkHmkkncgKmzgdEROMRQ+ba0o/y0SpndZAauJF04XBmqG Mvu7lHauvNNdsEU4Bbc/uKHYfHd1DKRop9eDbYwMIFCI7WGb2ioEJLO/++R+rI2a 7nexPKVZxwRUd+ypmuQHn67csMqBQ== X-ME-Sender: <xms:gbmVXptFLkyfVt_MH_oqzIUHxaQWmQy8U6k7CWUelPxuf14KHvHbFA> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrfedugdeifecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucffoh hmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgpdhouhhtlhhoohhkrdgtohhmnecukfhppeejjedrudef gedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrih hlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:gbmVXuRPUlQBftxodbx7SV-CBLyuCGmgsyiGUsD7TSKccdvM4zRrFg> <xmx:gbmVXoIVVAEAw4nPM9R60nVSexyYL3_2ikcePBZRRS361oSdbcDx0Q> <xmx:gbmVXpsxpt5wD3GD_VY9DZIZPrEV37Pn0nPTEDvf7qRyQ83zCj-QjA> <xmx:grmVXlmyeNIP7s9HDEX-xjhjvHAvCgG2XqRrloiviEmvjzcxkA7Meg> Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B71573280064; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 09:24:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> To: "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "Trahe, Fiona" <fiona.trahe@intel.com> Cc: "Coyle, David" <david.coyle@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>, "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>, "Ryan, Brendan" <brendan.ryan@intel.com>, "shreyansh.jain@nxp.com" <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>, "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, "akhil.goyal@nxp.com" <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>, Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>, Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>, Liron Himi <lironh@marvell.com>, Nagadheeraj Rottela <rnagadheeraj@marvell.com>, Srikanth Jampala <jsrikanth@marvell.com>, Gagandeep Singh <g.singh@nxp.com>, Jay Zhou <jianjay.zhou@huawei.com>, Ravi Kumar <ravi1.kumar@amd.com>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "Trahe, Fiona" <fiona.trahe@intel.com> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:24:14 +0200 Message-ID: <5745012.CvnuH1ECHv@thomas> In-Reply-To: <SN6PR11MB2880F52E69A56790B81AC924E4DA0@SN6PR11MB2880.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> References: <20200410142757.31508-1-david.coyle@intel.com> <3280198.8hb0ThOEGa@thomas> <SN6PR11MB2880F52E69A56790B81AC924E4DA0@SN6PR11MB2880.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] add AESNI-MB rawdev for multi-function processing X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> 14/04/2020 15:04, Trahe, Fiona: > > 14/04/2020 12:21, Ferruh Yigit: > > http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/MN2PR11MB35507D4B96677A41E66440C5E3C30@MN2PR11MB3550.na > > mprd11.prod.outlook.com/ > > > > I am not convinced. > > I don't like rawdev in general. > > Rawdev is good only for hardware support which cannot be generic > > like SoC, FPGA management or DMA engine. > > [Fiona] CRC and BIP are not crypto algorithms, they are error detection processes. > So there is no class in DPDK that these readily fit into. > There was resistance to adding another xxxddev, and even if one had been added > for error_detection_dev, there would still have been another layer needed > to couple this with cryptodev. Various proposals for this have been discussed on the ML > in RFC and recent patches, there doesn't seem to be an appetite for this as a generic API. > So it seems that only Intel has software and hardware engines that provide this > specialised feature coupling. In that case rawdev seems like the most > appropriate vehicle to expose this. Adding some vendor-specific API is not a good answer. It will work in some cases, but it won't make DPDK better. What's the purpose of DPDK if it's not solving a common problem for different hardware? > > Here the intent is to use rawdev because we don't find a good API. > > API defeat is a no-go. > > [Fiona] It's not that we haven't found a good API, but that there doesn't seem > to be a general requirement for such a specialised API There is a requirement to combine features of different classes. In the past, rte_security was an "answer" to this issue with crypto and ethdev. This is a real topic, please let's find a generic elegant solution.