On 2017/12/6 19:01, Halil Pasic wrote:
>
>
> On 12/06/2017 08:37 AM, Longpeng(Mike) wrote:
>> +\field{outcome_len} is the size of struct virtio_crypto_session_input or
>> +ZERO for the session-destroy operation.
>
> This ain't correct. It should have been something like
> virtio_crypto_destroy_session_input.
>
Hi Halil,
I already fixed this just now.
Do you have any other comments on v22 ? I'll send v23 tomorrow if no. :)
--
Regards,
Longpeng(Mike)
>> +
>> +
>> +\paragraph{Session operation}\label{sec:Device Types / Crypto Device /
>> Device
>> +Operation / Control Virtqueue / Session operation}
>> +
>> +The session is a handle which describes the cryptographic parameters to be
>> +applied to a number of buffers.
>> +
>> +The following structure stores the result of session creation set by the
>> device:
>> +
>> +\begin{lstlisting}
>> +struct virtio_crypto_session_input {
>> + /* Device write only portion */
>> + le64 session_id;
>> + le32 status;
>> + le32 padding;
>> +};
>> +\end{lstlisting}
>> +
>> +A request to destroy a session includes the following information:
>> +
>> +\begin{lstlisting}
>> +struct virtio_crypto_destroy_session_flf {
>> + /* Device read only portion */
>> + le64 session_id;
>> + /* Device write only portion */
>
> This is the device writable portion and thus what we cal op_outcome above.
> So it should have been
> };
>
>
> struct virtio_crypto_destroy_session_input {
>> + le32 status;
>> + le32 padding;
>> +};
>
> If we aren't consistent about it the dividing into parts (like op specific
> fixed and variable length (output) fields, operation outcome (input))
> isn't really helpful.
>
>
> Regards,
> Halil
>> +\end{lstlisting}
>
>
> .
>
--
Regards,
Longpeng(Mike)
