[EXT] [PATCH v3] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix cryptodev to SA mapping

[Radu Nicolau]

Hi Anoob, reply inline.

Regards,

Radu

On 27-Feb-24 5:19 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
> Hi Radu,
>
> Thanks for making the changes. I've one more question. Please see inline.
>
> Thanks,
> Anoob
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 3:56 PM
>> To: dev at dpdk.org
>> Cc: Anoob Joseph <anoobj at marvell.com>; Radu Nicolau
>> <radu.nicolau at intel.com>; stable at dpdk.org; Volodymyr Fialko
>> <vfialko at marvell.com>; Ting-Kai Ku <ting-kai.ku at intel.com>; Ciara Power
>> <ciara.power at intel.com>; Kai Ji <kai.ji at intel.com>; Akhil Goyal
>> <gakhil at marvell.com>
>> Subject: [EXT] [PATCH v3] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix cryptodev to SA mapping
>>
>> External Email
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> There are use cases where a SA should be able to use different cryptodevs on
>> different lcores, for example there can be cryptodevs with just 1 qp per VF.
>> For this purpose this patch relaxes the check in create lookaside session function.
>> Also add a check to verify that a CQP is available for the current lcore.
>>
>> Fixes: a8ade12123c3 ("examples/ipsec-secgw: create lookaside sessions at init")
>> Cc: stable at dpdk.org
>> Cc: vfialko at marvell.com
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>> Tested-by: Ting-Kai Ku <ting-kai.ku at intel.com>
>> Acked-by: Ciara Power <ciara.power at intel.com>
>> Acked-by: Kai Ji <kai.ji at intel.com>
>> ---
>> v3: check if the cryptodev are not of the same type
>>
>>   examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c index
>> f5cec4a928..b59576c049 100644
>> --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c
>> +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c
>> @@ -288,10 +288,21 @@ create_lookaside_session(struct ipsec_ctx
>> *ipsec_ctx_lcore[],
>>   		if (cdev_id == RTE_CRYPTO_MAX_DEVS)
>>   			cdev_id = ipsec_ctx->tbl[cdev_id_qp].id;
>>   		else if (cdev_id != ipsec_ctx->tbl[cdev_id_qp].id) {
>> -			RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC,
>> -					"SA mapping to multiple cryptodevs is "
>> -					"not supported!");
>> -			return -EINVAL;
>> +			struct rte_cryptodev_info dev_info_1, dev_info_2;
>> +			rte_cryptodev_info_get(cdev_id, &dev_info_1);
>> +			rte_cryptodev_info_get(ipsec_ctx->tbl[cdev_id_qp].id,
>> +					&dev_info_2);
>> +			if (dev_info_1.driver_id == dev_info_2.driver_id) {
>> +				RTE_LOG(WARNING, IPSEC,
>> +					"SA mapped to multiple cryptodevs for
>> SPI %d\n",
>> +					sa->spi);
>> +
>> +			} else {
>> +				RTE_LOG(WARNING, IPSEC,
>> +					"SA mapped to multiple cryptodevs of
>> different types for SPI %d\n",
>> +					sa->spi);
>> +
>> +			}
>>   		}
>>
>>   		/* Store per core queue pair information */ @@ -908,7 +919,11
>> @@ ipsec_enqueue(ipsec_xform_fn xform_func, struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx,
>>   			continue;
>>   		}
>>
>> -		enqueue_cop(sa->cqp[ipsec_ctx->lcore_id], &priv->cop);
>> +		if (likely(sa->cqp[ipsec_ctx->lcore_id]))
>> +			enqueue_cop(sa->cqp[ipsec_ctx->lcore_id], &priv->cop);
>> +		else
>> +			RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC, "No CQP available for lcore %d\n",
>> +					ipsec_ctx->lcore_id);
> [Anoob] Throwing an error won't be good enough, right? Won't this lead to packet leaks? Since it is datapath, can't we assume that the configuration would be done correctly in control path?
>
> I would suggest drop this specific change and we can enable multiple cryptodevs with lookaside SAs with the changes proposed.
With the change that removed the lazy initialization of SAs 
("examples/ipsec-secgw: create lookaside sessions at init") we can't 
assume anymore that a worker core has the proper CQP assigned, that is 
the reason I added the check here, the control path had no errors but 
there was no CQP assigned to a lcore. Indeed there will be dropped 
packets but at least there will be no segfault and the user will have an 
indication on what needs to be done - assign more cryptodevs.
>>   	}
>>   }
>>
>> --
>> 2.34.1