//resending with corrected Kirill email +Ed - known to be able to resolve tricky cross-project build issues. +vpp-dev - to avoid circular thread references :)
Sergio, On 11 Jan 2017, at 17:00, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.mon...@intel.com<mailto:sergio.gonzalez.mon...@intel.com>> wrote: I'll copy from the thread I started last week, we continue on this one. OK :) Basically, when we build VPP with DPDK Cryptodev support ('vpp_uses_dpdk_cryptodev=yes' at build time) we enable some Cryptodev PMDs that are disabled in DPDK by default. At the moment, the following Crypto PMDs are built: - QAT PMD: Driver for Intel QuickAssist Technology (QAT) devices. - AESNI-MB PMD: Software crypto with dependency on 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library' - AESNI-GCM PMD: Software crypto with dependency on 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library' The latest 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer' library source code is located in: https://github.com/01org/intel-ipsec-mb.git To successfully build DPDK with those PMDs enabled, we previously need to build the 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library' and set up the env variable AESNI_MULTI_BUFFER_LIB_PATH. Today csit-vpp-perf-* jobs use the VPP .deb packages from Nexus. Based on my (limited) understanding of build systems, this means VPP deb package that contains DPDK Cryptodev support needs to be built (using your build sequence above) and pushed to Nexus, *before* csit-vpp-perf-* job is invoke to run IPSec tests. Or am I oversimplifying? If yes - pls correct. If no - the next step would be to agree on the LF fd.io<http://fd.io> based job implementation to execute above, and I guess it would involve ci-management project, or? Ed, can you help us here? Also FYI, as Jim Thompson noted, we would have at least another library dependency with the next DPDK release. I think you’re referring to this comment by Jim: There is a pending patch to use ISA-L rather than the Intel IPsec MB lib. from https://lists.fd.io/pipermail/csit-dev/2017-January/001423.html This would mean modifying the 'Intel IPsec Multibuffer library’ building step while moving to the next DPDK release, yes? -Maciek P.S. This thread morphed from the previous one that went dormant: [csit-dev] VPP with DPDK Cryptodev CSIT IPsec tests https://lists.fd.io/pipermail/csit-dev/2017-January/001408.html Sergio On 11/01/2017 16:04, Jan Gelety -X (jgelety - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) wrote: + Sergio and Kirill From: csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io> [mailto:csit-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Jan Gelety -X (jgelety - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 14:44 To: Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com><mailto:damar...@cisco.com> Cc: csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io> Subject: [csit-dev] crypto-dev support/libraries Hello Damjan, As shortly mentioned on yesterday’s VPP call – could you, please, give us an info how to proceed when we need to test crypto related stuff? Do we need to build crypto libraries separately on every machine where the VPP will be run? Thank you very much. Regards, Jan _______________________________________________ csit-dev mailing list csit-...@lists.fd.io<mailto:csit-...@lists.fd.io> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/csit-dev
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
