netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] net: Generalize udp based tunnel offload

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 30 Nov 2015 16:25:40 -0800
From:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...nel.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
	Anjali Singhai Jain <anjali.singhai@...el.com>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] net: Generalize udp based tunnel offload

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 7:21 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 13:53:44 -0800
>
>> The bad effect of this model is that it is encourages HW vendors to
>> continue implement HW protocol specific support for encapsulations, we
>> get so much more benefit if they implement protocol generic
>> mechanisms.
>
> +1

Regardless of what happens in the future, I think the main question is
how this relates to the code that is currently present in the tree. We
already have NDOs for VXLAN offloading, which is about as protocol
specific as you can get. In my mind, this series is strictly an
improvement to what is already there - it pulls all hardware
offloading code out of the various protocol implementations and VXLAN
out of the driver interface. That seems like a pretty nice cleanup to
me.
--
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