Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/ipsec: fix test suite setup function

["Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>]

Hi Konstantin

<snip>

> > Subject: [PATCH] test/ipsec: fix test suite setup function
> >
> > Check for valid crypto_null devices before continuing.
> >
> > Fixes: 05fe65eb66b2 ("test/ipsec: introduce functional test")
> > Signed-off-by: Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  test/test/test_ipsec.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/test/test/test_ipsec.c b/test/test/test_ipsec.c index
> > ff1a1c4..4dfc55b 100644
> > --- a/test/test/test_ipsec.c
> > +++ b/test/test/test_ipsec.c
> > @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@
> >  #define BURST_SIZE		32
> >  #define REORDER_PKTS	1
> >
> > +static int gbl_driver_id;
> > +
> 
> Why do you need that global here?

test_ipsec.c is based on test_cryptodev.c.
gbl_driver_id used to store the ID of the required driver.

> 
> >  struct user_params {
> >  	enum rte_crypto_sym_xform_type auth;
> >  	enum rte_crypto_sym_xform_type cipher; @@ -218,7 +220,7 @@
> > testsuite_setup(void)  {
> >  	struct ipsec_testsuite_params *ts_params = &testsuite_params;
> >  	struct rte_cryptodev_info info;
> > -	uint32_t nb_devs, dev_id;
> > +	uint32_t i, nb_devs, dev_id;
> >  	size_t sess_sz;
> >
> >  	memset(ts_params, 0, sizeof(*ts_params)); @@ -251,7 +253,18 @@
> > testsuite_setup(void)
> >  		return TEST_FAILED;
> >  	}
> >
> > -	ts_params->valid_devs[ts_params->valid_dev_count++] = 0;
> > +	gbl_driver_id = rte_cryptodev_driver_id_get(
> > +				RTE_STR(CRYPTODEV_NAME_NULL_PMD));

These tests only work with the crypto_null  PMD's,  gbl_driver_id is set to the crypto_null PMD id here.

> > +
> > +	/* Create list of valid crypto devs */
> > +	for (i = 0; i < nb_devs; i++) {
> > +		rte_cryptodev_info_get(i, &info);
> > +		if (info.driver_id == gbl_driver_id)
> > +			ts_params->valid_devs[ts_params->valid_dev_count++]
> = i;
> > +	}
> 
> I think you need to check driver capabilities, instead of relying on driver name.

I don't think it is necessary to check the driver capabilities.
This is how it is done in test_cryptodev.c.
 I think it makes sense to mirror the test_cryptodev.c implementation. 
 
> > +
> > +	if (ts_params->valid_dev_count < 1)
> > +		return TEST_FAILED;
> >
> >  	/* Set up all the qps on the first of the valid devices found */
> >  	dev_id = ts_params->valid_devs[0];
> 
> If we always use just valid_dev[0] to determine private session size, why do you
> keep going though all devs in the loop above?

There may be several crypto devs present for example, crypto_aesni_mb0, crypto_aseni_mb1, crypto_null0 and  crypto_null1.
The valid_dev[] array will contain all devs of the requested type, in this case crypto_null0 and crypto_null1.

> Another thing, as I mentioned off-line - later you still use all vald_devs[] to init
> session:
> s = rte_cryptodev_sym_session_create(qp->mp_session);
>         if (s == NULL)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
> 
>         /* initiliaze SA crypto session for all supported devices */
>         for (i = 0; i != devnum; i++) {
>                 rc = rte_cryptodev_sym_session_init(devid[i], s,
>                         ut->crypto_xforms, qp->mp_session_private);
>                 if (rc != 0)
>                         break;
>         }
> 
> I think we need either to determine max private session size based on *all*
> valid_devs[], or just use one device that can do NULL algorithm.

The valid_devs[] array only contains crypto_null PMD's 
The code is using the crypto_null PMD only. 

> As we always enqueue/dequeuer into valid_devs[0] - I think there is no point to
> have an arrays here, just single valid_dev should be sufficient.

The test program may be started with several crypto_dev PMD's for example:

test -c f -n 4 --vdev crypto_aesni_mb0 --vdev crypto_null0 --vdev crypto_aesni_mb1 --vdev crypto_dev_null1

In this case the valid_devs[] array will contain crypto_dev_null0 and crypto_dev_null1.

> Konstantin
> 
> 

Regards,

Bernard.