[PATCH v2] app/test-crypto-perf: add throughput OOP decryption
Akhil Goyal
gakhil at marvell.com
Thu Jun 20 08:44:43 CEST 2024
Hi Brian,
Since Ciara is no longer available and you are the new maintainer, can you investigate this patch?
There were some concerns which Ciara highlighted. Can you check?
Regards,
Akhil
> > Subject: [PATCH v2] app/test-crypto-perf: add throughput OOP decryption
> >
> > During throughput running, re-filling the test data will impact the performance
> > test result. So for now, to run decrypt throughput testing is not supported since
> > the test data is not filled.
> >
> > But if user requires OOP(out-of-place) mode, the test data from source mbuf
> will
> > never be modified, and if the test data can be prepared out of the running loop,
> > the decryption test should be fine.
> >
> > This commit adds the support of out-of-place decryption testing for throughput.
> >
> > [1]:
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-
> 3A__mails.dpdk.org_archives_dev_2023-
> 2DJuly_273328.html&d=DwIFAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=DnL7Si2wl_P
> RwpZ9TWey3eu68gBzn7DkPwuqhd6WNyo&m=eTj0O7iYH-
> xiTQ6dNUZpsOXPqnyC1O_-
> _IKt0j_yQ_N__vy0wIBLb_QyMQtodUrr&s=eDz_NLjqkUH2cYMilKEtdWImOPj5f-
> CVKV5UW8P9frk&e=
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suanming Mou <suanmingm at nvidia.com>
> > ---
> > app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_ops.c | 5 ++-
> > app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_options_parsing.c | 8 +++++ app/test-crypto-
> > perf/cperf_test_throughput.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++---
> > 3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_ops.c b/app/test-crypto-
> perf/cperf_ops.c
> > index d3fd115bc0..714616c697 100644
> > --- a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_ops.c
> > +++ b/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_ops.c
> > @@ -644,7 +644,10 @@ cperf_set_ops_aead(struct rte_crypto_op **ops,
> > }
> >
> > if ((options->test == CPERF_TEST_TYPE_VERIFY) ||
> > - (options->test == CPERF_TEST_TYPE_LATENCY)) {
> > + (options->test == CPERF_TEST_TYPE_LATENCY) ||
> > + (options->test == CPERF_TEST_TYPE_THROUGHPUT &&
> > + (options->aead_op == RTE_CRYPTO_AEAD_OP_DECRYPT ||
> > + options->cipher_op == RTE_CRYPTO_CIPHER_OP_DECRYPT))) {
> > for (i = 0; i < nb_ops; i++) {
> > uint8_t *iv_ptr = rte_crypto_op_ctod_offset(ops[i],
> > uint8_t *, iv_offset);
> > diff --git a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_options_parsing.c b/app/test-crypto-
> > perf/cperf_options_parsing.c
> > index 8c20974273..90526e676f 100644
> > --- a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_options_parsing.c
> > +++ b/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_options_parsing.c
> > @@ -1341,6 +1341,14 @@ cperf_options_check(struct cperf_options
> > *options)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > + if (options->test == CPERF_TEST_TYPE_THROUGHPUT &&
> > + (options->aead_op == RTE_CRYPTO_AEAD_OP_DECRYPT ||
> > + options->auth_op == RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_OP_VERIFY) &&
> > + !options->out_of_place) {
> > + RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1, "Only out-of-place is allowed in
> > throughput decryption.\n");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
>
> Not totally following some of this, why do we only want to add this for OOP
> mode?
>
> For example an inplace command I can use before this patch but not after:
> ./build/app/dpdk-test-crypto-perf -l 2,3 -- --ptest throughput --optype aead --
> aead-algo aes-gcm --aead-op decrypt --devtype crypto_qat --aead-key-sz 16
>
> I get an error;
> USER1: Only out-of-place is allowed in throughput decryption.
> USER1: Checking one or more user options failed
>
> Do we want to always force the user to use OOP + test vector file for these
> throughput decryption tests?
> Or should we just add a warning that the throughput may not be reflecting the
> "success" verify path in PMD if using inplace and the dummy data.
>
> I am not sure.
> If we do want to add the limitation on the throughput tests, these changes I think
> are ok for that.
>
> Thanks,
> Ciara
>
> > +
> > if (options->op_type == CPERF_CIPHER_ONLY ||
> > options->op_type == CPERF_CIPHER_THEN_AUTH ||
> > options->op_type == CPERF_AUTH_THEN_CIPHER) { diff
> > --git a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_test_throughput.c b/app/test-crypto-
> > perf/cperf_test_throughput.c
> > index e3d266d7a4..b347baa913 100644
> > --- a/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_test_throughput.c
> > +++ b/app/test-crypto-perf/cperf_test_throughput.c
> > @@ -99,6 +99,26 @@ cperf_throughput_test_constructor(struct rte_mempool
> > *sess_mp,
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > +static void
> > +cperf_verify_init_ops(struct rte_mempool *mp __rte_unused,
> > + void *opaque_arg,
> > + void *obj,
> > + __rte_unused unsigned int i)
> > +{
> > + uint16_t iv_offset = sizeof(struct rte_crypto_op) +
> > + sizeof(struct rte_crypto_sym_op);
> > + uint32_t imix_idx = 0;
> > + struct cperf_throughput_ctx *ctx = opaque_arg;
> > + struct rte_crypto_op *op = obj;
> > +
> > + (ctx->populate_ops)(&op, ctx->src_buf_offset,
> > + ctx->dst_buf_offset,
> > + 1, ctx->sess, ctx->options,
> > + ctx->test_vector, iv_offset, &imix_idx, NULL);
> > +
> > + cperf_mbuf_set(op->sym->m_src, ctx->options, ctx->test_vector); }
> > +
> > int
> > cperf_throughput_test_runner(void *test_ctx) { @@ -144,6 +164,9 @@
> > cperf_throughput_test_runner(void *test_ctx)
> > uint16_t iv_offset = sizeof(struct rte_crypto_op) +
> > sizeof(struct rte_crypto_sym_op);
> >
> > + if (ctx->options->out_of_place)
> > + rte_mempool_obj_iter(ctx->pool, cperf_verify_init_ops, (void
> > *)ctx);
> > +
> > while (test_burst_size <= ctx->options->max_burst_size) {
> > uint64_t ops_enqd = 0, ops_enqd_total = 0, ops_enqd_failed =
> > 0;
> > uint64_t ops_deqd = 0, ops_deqd_total = 0, ops_deqd_failed =
> > 0; @@ -176,11 +199,12 @@ cperf_throughput_test_runner(void *test_ctx)
> > }
> >
> > /* Setup crypto op, attach mbuf etc */
> > - (ctx->populate_ops)(ops, ctx->src_buf_offset,
> > - ctx->dst_buf_offset,
> > - ops_needed, ctx->sess,
> > - ctx->options, ctx->test_vector,
> > - iv_offset, &imix_idx, &tsc_start);
> > + if (!ctx->options->out_of_place)
> > + (ctx->populate_ops)(ops, ctx->src_buf_offset,
> > + ctx->dst_buf_offset,
> > + ops_needed, ctx->sess,
> > + ctx->options, ctx->test_vector,
> > + iv_offset, &imix_idx,
> > &tsc_start);
> >
> > /**
> > * When ops_needed is smaller than ops_enqd, the
> > --
> > 2.34.1
More information about the dev
mailing list