Ack. Thanks Shally
>-----Original Message----- >From: De Lara Guarch, Pablo [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: 26 June 2018 14:50 >To: Verma, Shally <[email protected]> >Cc: Trahe, Fiona <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; >Athreya, Narayana Prasad ><[email protected]>; Sahu, Sunila <[email protected]>; >Gupta, Ashish <[email protected]> >Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/6] lib/cryptodev: add asym op support in cryptodev > >External Email > >Hi Shally, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Shally Verma [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 7:05 AM >> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <[email protected]> >> Cc: Trahe, Fiona <[email protected]>; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; Sunila Sahu >> <[email protected]>; Ashish Gupta >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: [PATCH v3 2/6] lib/cryptodev: add asym op support in cryptodev >> >> Extend DPDK librte_cryptodev to: >> - define asym op type in rte_crypto_op_type and associated >> op pool create/alloc APIs >> - define asym session and associated session APIs >> >> If PMD shows in its feature flag that it supports both sym and asym then it >> must >> support those on all its qps. >> >> Changes from v2: >> - added rte_cryptodev_asym_session_set/get_private_data for app to setup >> private data in a session as per latest dpdk-next-crypto spec >> - rename rte_cryptodev_get_asym_session_private_size to be consistent with >> other API names >> - correct rte_cryptodev_asym_session_create to pass void** to >> rte_mempool_get() and add for private_data_size flag >> >> Changes from v1 >> - resolve new line error in librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev_version.map >> >> Signed-off-by: Shally Verma <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Sunila Sahu <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Ashish Gupta <[email protected]> > >... > >> +int __rte_experimental >> +rte_cryptodev_asym_session_init(uint8_t dev_id, >> + struct rte_cryptodev_asym_session *sess, >> + struct rte_crypto_asym_xform *xforms, >> + struct rte_mempool *mp) >> +{ >> + struct rte_cryptodev *dev; >> + uint8_t index; >> + int ret; >> + >> + dev = rte_cryptodev_pmd_get_dev(dev_id); >> + >> + if (sess == NULL || xforms == NULL || dev == NULL) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + >> + index = dev->driver_id; >> + > >Check if asym_session_configure is implemented in the device, like this: > >RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->asym_session_configure, -ENOTSUP); > >This way, there won't be a segmentation fault when using a device that >does not support asymmetric operations. > >> + if (sess->sess_private_data[index] == NULL) { >> + ret = dev->dev_ops->asym_session_configure(dev, >> + xforms, >> + sess, mp); >> + if (ret < 0) { >> + CDEV_LOG_ERR( >> + "dev_id %d failed to configure session >> details", >> + dev_id); >> + return ret; > >... > >> +int __rte_experimental >> +rte_cryptodev_asym_session_clear(uint8_t dev_id, >> + struct rte_cryptodev_asym_session *sess) { >> + struct rte_cryptodev *dev; >> + >> + dev = rte_cryptodev_pmd_get_dev(dev_id); >> + >> + if (dev == NULL || sess == NULL) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + > >Same as above, add the following. > >RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->asym_session_clear, -ENOTSUP); > >> + dev->dev_ops->asym_session_clear(dev, sess); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} > >I will send a patch doing the same for symmetric. > >Pablo
