[PATCH 0/1] Add security perf application

[Anoob Joseph]

Hi Akhil,

Do you have any further comments?

Thanks,
Anoob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anoob Joseph <anoobj at marvell.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 12:50 PM
> To: Akhil Goyal <gakhil at marvell.com>
> Cc: Aakash Sasidharan <asasidharan at marvell.com>; dev at dpdk.org;
> techboard at dpdk.org; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj at marvell.com>; Thomas
> Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>; Hemant Agrawal
> <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>; Sachin Saxena <sachin.saxena at oss.nxp.com>;
> Ciara Power <ciara.power at intel.com>
> Subject: [EXT] RE: [PATCH 0/1] Add security perf application
> 
> External Email
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Akhil,
> 
> Please see inline.
> 
> Thanks,
> Anoob
> 
> >
> > Hi Anoob,
> > > Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Add security perf application
> > >
> > > Add performance application to test security session create &
> > > destroy rates supported by the security enabled cryptodev PMD. The
> > > application would create specified number of sessions and captures
> > > the time taken for the same before proceeding to destroy of the
> > > same. When operating on multi-core, the number of sessions would be
> > > evenly distributed across all cores.
> > >
> > > The application would test with all combinations of cipher & auth
> > > algorithms supported by the PMD.
> > >
> > > The app is similar to 'test-flow-perf' tool which captures the rate
> > > at which flow rules can be created and destroyed.
> > >
> > Is it not good to add this into dpdk-test-crypto-perf?
> 
> [Anoob] IMO, It is not good. Following are the reasons,
> 
> Dpdk-test-crypto-perf is primarily for capturing crypto operation throughputs.
> And so the framework allocates minimal number of sessions and the datapath
> function pointer etc deals with only one session. The entire framework available
> in that application is for populating crypto_op and mbuf, which is not required
> for this app. Touching that framework would mean throughput tests would get
> affected, which I don't think is the right thing to do. And for PMDs like Intel's
> (which don't have security support), it would be an unnecessary performance
> drop.
> 
> The proposed app currently runs for all supported ciphers while in dpdk-test-
> crypto-perf, it runs only for a specific algorithm combination. If we want to limit
> the functionality of the proposed app to match dpdk-test-crypto-perf usage,
> that also calls for a major rework.
> 
> And the only thing that can be reused is probably cryptodev init & queue pair
> configuration. As you are well aware, security device can be cryptodev or an
> ethdev. Dpdk-test-crypto-perf doesn't have support for initializing ethdev and
> rightfully so. Adding this to an already complicated framework will be counter
> productive in the long run.
> 
> > Can we add as a separate .c file, say, cperf_test_sec_session.c in
> > test-crypto- perf folder and use the existing framework.
> 
> [Anoob] As I mentioned earlier, nothing from the framework can be leveraged
> for this application. If you insist on not having a new app, then all this can be
> integrated into dpdk-test-crypto-perf, but that will follow it's own path from
> very early stage (mempool allocations etc need to happen differently). And it
> would mean adding more command line options (which is currently at 37) as we
> add more options for measuring security perf.
> 
> > This way we can leverage it for crypto sessions also.
> >
> >
> > > Anoob Joseph (1):
> > >   app/test-security-perf: add security perf app
> > >
> > >  MAINTAINERS                                 |   6 +
> > >  app/meson.build                             |   1 +
> > >  app/test-security-perf/meson.build          |  14 +
> > >  app/test-security-perf/test_security_perf.c | 554
> > ++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  doc/guides/tools/index.rst                  |   1 +
> > >  doc/guides/tools/securityperf.rst           |  47 ++
> > >  6 files changed, 623 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 app/test-security-perf/meson.build
> > >  create mode 100644 app/test-security-perf/test_security_perf.c
> > >  create mode 100644 doc/guides/tools/securityperf.rst
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.25.1