DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
To: "Coyle, David" <david.coyle@intel.com>,
	"akhil.goyal@nxp.com" <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>,
	"Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
	"Trahe, Fiona" <fiona.trahe@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"Ryan, Brendan" <brendan.ryan@intel.com>,
	"O'loingsigh, Mairtin" <mairtin.oloingsigh@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] app/crypto-perf: set mbuf lengths correctly for DOCSIS tests
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:52:08 +0000
Message-ID: <SN6PR11MB3101E72D919F004088CDAD7484790@SN6PR11MB3101.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB355001AB95C235F2D7FA3347E37B0@MN2PR11MB3550.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Hi David,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Coyle, David <david.coyle@intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 1:59 PM
> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>;
> akhil.goyal@nxp.com; Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty@intel.com>; Trahe,
> Fiona <fiona.trahe@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ryan, Brendan <brendan.ryan@intel.com>; O'loingsigh,
> Mairtin <mairtin.oloingsigh@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] app/crypto-perf: set mbuf lengths correctly for DOCSIS
> tests
> Hi Pablo,
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> > Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 8:04 PM
> > > @@ -48,6 +48,10 @@ cperf_set_ops_security(struct rte_crypto_op **ops,
> > >  			} else
> > >  				buf_sz = options->test_buffer_size;
> > >
> > > +			sym_op->m_src->buf_len = options->segment_sz;
> > > +			sym_op->m_src->data_len = buf_sz;
> > > +			sym_op->m_src->pkt_len = buf_sz;
> > > +
> >
> > Actually, I am wondering why this is needed at all (for DOCSIS and
> > PDCP). This is already set in " fill_multi_seg_mbuf" or "
> > fill_single_seg_mbuf" (and this was already working without this patch, right?).
> [DC] I have found that if a number of buffer sizes are specified like this on the
> cmd line "--buffer-sz 64,256,1024", then the pkt_len and data_len filled in
> "fill_multi_seg_mbuf" or " fill_single_seg_mbuf" is always the largest of the sizes
> specified. The cipher/auth lengths are then set based on the --buffer-sz option.
> For DOCSIS, I tried to be more accurate and set the correct pkt_len and data_len
> in the mbuf. This followed what PDCP did too, even though I'm not sure of the
> background why PDCP did it - possibly spotted the same issue. I have also found
> that DOCSIS performance figures can be better if the correct pkt_len and
> data_len are set in the mbuf - I don't have any proper explanation for this
> though as the cipher/ auth lengths are always the same.
> I've dug around a bit more on this now though and this is actually a problem
> across the perf tool. Some of the crypto PMDs have logic based on the mbuf
> pkt_len and data_len, but because the perf tool isn't always setting these fields
> correctly, that logic may not work as expected.
> >

Right, thanks for checking this. If I remember correctly, it was fine to have this set to the maximum size as the important field for crypto PMDs to check is the cipher/auth lengths, as you said. If there is more logic that depends on data_len on other PMDs, I agree it might be a problem. The only usage I knew for it was the multi segment case (in AES-GCM PMD), where data_len is checked in each segment size to see if all the cipher/auth length resides within these segments, but in the tool we set data_len for each segment when "going multi-segment". I see that other PMDs like DPAA2_SEC use these fields for something which I am not sure what's for. It would be good if the maintainers check if this is a problem for them, and in that case, this should be fixed for the other functions (for "normal" crypto).


  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-22  8:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-16 15:31 David Coyle
2020-07-17 19:03 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2020-07-20 12:59   ` Coyle, David
2020-07-22  8:52     ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo [this message]
2020-07-28 19:44       ` Akhil Goyal
2020-07-29 16:18         ` Akhil Goyal

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:

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=SN6PR11MB3101E72D919F004088CDAD7484790@SN6PR11MB3101.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
    --cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
    --cc=brendan.ryan@intel.com \
    --cc=david.coyle@intel.com \
    --cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=fiona.trahe@intel.com \
    --cc=mairtin.oloingsigh@intel.com \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git