[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] cryptodev: rework mod exp and mod inv comments

[Kusztal, ArkadiuszX]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shally Verma [mailto:shallyv at marvell.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:38 AM
> To: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Cc: akhil.goyal at nxp.com; Trahe, Fiona <fiona.trahe at intel.com>;
> sunila.sahu at caviumnetworks.com; ashish.gupta at caviumnetworks.com;
> umesh.kartha at caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] cryptodev: rework mod exp and mod inv comments
> 
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>
> >Sent: 06 February 2019 15:04
> >To: Shally Verma <shallyv at marvell.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> >Cc: akhil.goyal at nxp.com; Trahe, Fiona <fiona.trahe at intel.com>;
> >sunila.sahu at caviumnetworks.com; ashish.gupta at caviumnetworks.com;
> >umesh.kartha at caviumnetworks.com
> >Subject: [EXT] RE: [PATCH v2] cryptodev: rework mod exp and mod inv
> >comments
> >
> >External Email
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >Hi Shally,
> >
> >Thanks for your feedback.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Shally Verma [mailto:shallyv at marvell.com]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 6:08 AM
> >> To: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> >> Cc: akhil.goyal at nxp.com; Trahe, Fiona <fiona.trahe at intel.com>;
> >> sunila.sahu at caviumnetworks.com; ashish.gupta at caviumnetworks.com;
> >> umesh.kartha at caviumnetworks.com
> >> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] cryptodev: rework mod exp and mod inv
> >> comments
> >>
> >> HI Arek,
> >>
> >> Acked with minor feedback.
> >>
> >> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >From: Arek Kusztal <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>
> >> >Sent: 05 February 2019 23:50
> >> >To: dev at dpdk.org
> >> >Cc: akhil.goyal at nxp.com; fiona.trahe at intel.com;
> >> >shally.verma at caviumnetworks.com; sunila.sahu at caviumnetworks.com;
> >> >ashish.gupta at caviumnetworks.com;
> umesh.kartha at caviumnetworks.com;
> >> Arek
> >> >Kusztal <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>
> >> >Subject: [PATCH v2] cryptodev: rework mod exp and mod inv comments
> >> >
> >> >External Email
> >> >
> >> >This patch changes modular exponentiation and modular multiplicative
> >> >inverse API comments to make it more precise.
> >> >
> >> >Signed-off-by: Arek Kusztal <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>
> >> >---
> >> >v2:
> >> >- grammar fixes
> >> >
> >> > lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h | 44
> >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> >> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> Acked-by: Shally Verma <shally.verma at marvell.com>
> >>
> >> >diff --git a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h
> >> >b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h
> >> >index 5e185b2..9582ee3 100644
> >> >--- a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h
> >> >+++ b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_crypto_asym.h
> >> >@@ -72,8 +72,8 @@ enum rte_crypto_asym_xform_type {
> >> >         * Refer to rte_crypto_asym_op_type
> >> >         */
> >> >        RTE_CRYPTO_ASYM_XFORM_MODINV,
> >> >-       /**< Modular Inverse
> >> >-        * Perform Modulus inverse b^(-1) mod n
> >> >+       /**< Modular Multiplicative Inverse
> >> >+        * Perform Modular Multiplicative Inverse b^(-1) mod n
> >> >         */
> >> >        RTE_CRYPTO_ASYM_XFORM_MODEX,
> >> >        /**< Modular Exponentiation
> >> >@@ -233,29 +233,39 @@ struct rte_crypto_rsa_xform {  struct
> >> >rte_crypto_modex_xform {
> >> >        rte_crypto_param modulus;
> >> >        /**< modulus
> >> >-        * Prime modulus of the modexp transform operation in octet-string
> >> >-        * network byte order format.
> >> >+        * Pointer to the modulus data for modexp transform operation
> >> >+        * in octet-string network byte order format, any positive integer
> >> >+        *
> >> This statement looks incomplete. You can write it "it should be
> >> positive integer " but is it required to be mentioned? Coz input is
> >> array of uint8_t so assumption is it will be positive.
> >>
> >Actually by this we meant that there is no constraint  (if should be
> >prime, co-prime, semi-prime, multi-prime, less than... etc), But yes
> >this is only informational and probably could even be omitted
> So, will you be re-wording these comments for better clarity?
> 
> Thanks
> Shally

Yes, I will remove "positive integer"

> >
> >> ...
> >> > struct rte_crypto_modinv_xform {
> >> >        rte_crypto_param modulus;
> >> >        /**<
> >> >-        * Pointer to the prime modulus data for modular
> >> >-        * inverse operation in octet-string network byte
> >> >-        * order format.
> >> >+        * Pointer to the modulus data for modular multiplicative inverse
> >> >+        * operation in octet-string network byte order format,
> >> >+        * positive integer
> >> Same comment as above.
> >>
> >> >+        *
> >> >+        * In case this number is equal to zero the driver shall set
> >> >+        * the crypto op status field to RTE_CRYPTO_OP_STATUS_ERROR
> >> >+        *
> >> >+        * This number shall be relatively prime to base
> >> >+        * in corresponding Modular Multiplicative Inverse
> >> >+        * rte_crypto_mod_op_param
> >> >         */
> >> > };
> >> >
> >> >@@ -317,14 +327,18 @@ struct rte_crypto_dsa_xform {
> >> >
> >> ...
> >>
> >> >2.1.0