On 23-Jul-24 5:57 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
Hi all,
This patch breaks ipsec tests with ipsec-secgw:
./examples/ipsec-secgw/test/run_test.sh -4 trs_aesctr_sha1
...
ERROR: ./examples/ipsec-secgw/test/linux_test.sh failed for dst=192.168.31.14,
sz=1
test IPv4 trs_aesctr_sha1 finished with status 1
ERROR test trs_aesctr_sha1 FAILED
The patch seems to be correct.
Please check endianness in the PMD you are testing.
In my opinion salt should not be affected by endianness and it should be
used as it is in the key parameter. I think the patch is wrong to make
it CPU endianness dependent before being passed to the PMDs, any PMD
that needs the endianness swapped should do it in the PMD code. Indeed
it's passed around as a 32 bit integer but it's not used as such, and
when it's actually used it should be evaluated as a byte array.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4106#section-4
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4106#section-8.1
On 03/07/2024 18:58, Akhil Goyal wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Akhil Goyal <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2024 12:42 AM
To: Akhil Goyal <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Chaoyong He
<[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <mailto:oss-
[email protected]> ; Shihong Wang <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> ;
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH v2] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix
SA salt
endianness problem
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH v2] examples/ipsec-
secgw: fix SA salt
endianness problem
From: Shihong Wang
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
The SA salt of struct ipsec_sa is a CPU-endian
u32 variable, but it’s
value is stored in an array of encryption or
authentication keys
according to big-endian. So it maybe need to
convert the endianness
order to ensure that the value assigned to the
SA salt is CPU-endian.
Fixes: 50d75cae2a2c ("examples/ipsec-secgw:
initialize SA salt")
Fixes: 9413c3901f31 ("examples/ipsec-secgw:
support additional algorithms")
Fixes: 501e9c226adf ("examples/ipsec-secgw:
add AEAD parameters")
Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Shihong Wang
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Chaoyong He
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
Acked-by: Akhil Goyal <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
Applied to dpdk-next-crypto
The patch is pulled back from dpdk-next-crypto.
This change may cause all the PMDs to fail these cases.
Would need acks from PMDs.
Applied to dpdk-next-crypto
No update from PMD owners.
Applying it before RC2 so that we have time for fixes if needed.
--
Regards,
Vladimir
