netdev - Re: [QUESTION] multi-core, multi-crypto, ipsec/udp out of order.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140602124649.GA2503@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:	Mon, 2 Jun 2014 20:46:49 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	"Hsieh, Che-Min" <cheminh@....qualcomm.com>
Cc:	"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Subject: Re: [QUESTION] multi-core, multi-crypto,  ipsec/udp out of order.

On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 02:22:17PM +0000, Hsieh, Che-Min wrote:
> Hi! Herbert:
> 
>   In a system of multi cpu core, with multiple crypto hardware, different irq for each, is it possible the udp receive get out of order for the same tfm?
>  
> Let us say, of the same tfm, driver distributes requests to any available crypto hardware.  For the same tfm, driver re-sequences response before complete callout to the same arrival sequence of the requests. The complete callout is running at tasklet level of the system.
> 
> Each irq is assigned to a different irq affinity cpu core to improve the performance. Therefore the iprecv and ipsec processing can be done by multiple cpu cores at the same time for the same tfm/udp.
> 
> I am seeing the following -   if I assign irq affinity to different cpu cores, iperf server of udp session displays receive out of order message. If I assign them to the same core, or take default, then message stops. The assignment is done by hand while the system is running, by updating  /proc/irq/xxx/smp_affinity, where xxx is the irq number. This scenario is very repeatable. 
> 
> We are on linux-3.10.
> 
> Does it make sense?

Are we talking about an in-tree driver? If so which one?

It's not certainly not meant to change packet ordering.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html