[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC 0/8] virtio-crypto: add multiplex
From: |
Halil Pasic |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC 0/8] virtio-crypto: add multiplexing mode support |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Sep 2017 19:33:08 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 |
On 09/14/2017 02:58 AM, Longpeng (Mike) wrote:
>
>
> On 2017/9/14 2:14, Halil Pasic wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 09/11/2017 03:10 AM, Longpeng(Mike) wrote:
>>> *NOTE*
>>> The code realization is based on the latest virtio crypto spec:
>>> [PATCH v19 0/2] virtio-crypto: virtio crypto device specification
>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-08/msg05217.html
>>>
>>> In session mode, the process of create/close a session
>>> makes we have a least one full round-trip cost from guest to host to guest
>>> to be able to send any data for symmetric algorithms. It gets ourself into
>>> synchronization troubles in some scenarios like a web server handling lots
>>> of small requests whose algorithms and keys are different.
>>>
>>> We can support one-blob request (no sessions) as well for symmetric
>>> algorithms, including HASH, MAC services. The benefit is obvious for
>>> HASH service because it's usually a one-blob operation.
>>>
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I've just started looking at this. Patch #1 modifies linux/virtio_crypto.h
>> which if I compare with the (almost) latest linux master is different. Thus
>> I would expect a corresponding kernel patch set too, but I haven't received
>> one, nor did I find a reference in the cover letter.
>>
>> I think if I want to test the new features I need the kernel counter-part
>> too, or?
>>
>> Could you point me to the kernel counterpart?
>>
>
>
> Hi Halil,
>
> We haven't implemented the kernel frontend part yet, but there's a testcase
> based on qtest, you can use it.
>
> Please see the attachment.
>
Thanks Longpeng! I have two problems with this: first I can't use this on s390x
and as you may have noticed I'm working mostly on s390x (that's what I'm payed
for). OK, my laptop is amd64 so I was able to try it out, and that leads to the
next problem. I can't test before/after and cross version stuff with this. That
hurts me because I have a feeling things can be done simpler but that feeling
has
failed me before, so I tend to try out first and then start a discussion.
Is some kernel patch series already in the pipeline?
Regards,
Halil
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 4/8] cryptodev: add stateless mode cipher support, (continued)
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 4/8] cryptodev: add stateless mode cipher support, Longpeng(Mike), 2017/09/10
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 8/8] virtio-crypto: add host feature bits support, Longpeng(Mike), 2017/09/10
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 7/8] cryptodev-builtin: add stateless cipher support, Longpeng(Mike), 2017/09/10
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 6/8] cryptodev: extract one util function, Longpeng(Mike), 2017/09/10
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 5/8] virtio-crypto: add stateless crypto request handler, Longpeng(Mike), 2017/09/10
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 2/8] virtio-crypto: add session creation logic for mux mode, Longpeng(Mike), 2017/09/10
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC 1/8] virtio-crypto: add new definations for multiplexing mode, Longpeng(Mike), 2017/09/10
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 0/8] virtio-crypto: add multiplexing mode support, no-reply, 2017/09/10
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 0/8] virtio-crypto: add multiplexing mode support, Halil Pasic, 2017/09/13