Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC 0/8] virtio-crypto: add multiplexing mode support

[Halil Pasic]

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